Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Justin <jlec@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: PROPERTIES=funky-slots
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2012 16:48:20
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: PROPERTIES=funky-slots by Ciaran McCreesh
On 23.06.2012 18:17, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 18:13:23 +0200 > Justin <jlec@g.o> wrote: >> Did you read what you wrote and thought about what you request from >> others? Probably you better should. > > Uh huh, and I think we all know there's a huge difference between > knowing what versions and slots are and knowing what "a multilib" is. >
Might be right, but that doesn't allow you to break your own rules. Plus I still don't get the problem of using SLOTS in the way they are used now. And I can't find this out by simply googling. In contrast, an explanation of multilib in context of linux distribution and more specific gentoo can be found easily. But that's nothing I wanted to discuss here. Stop acting in this arrogant way you are doing right now. This doesn't make sympathetic in any way and heavily overshadows the technically skills you will have for sure.
>> An example: >> >> "...slots and versions to "mean" something other than what they used >> to,..." >> >> is completely useless without a description of what SLOTS are about >> and how the should be used. And what is the wrong usage you can find; >> examples are necessary here for understanding. > > That's covered in the devmanual and in the user documentation, so > there's no need to repeat it here.
Ever heard about references. They are good, if you don't like to repeat what is written, but which are necessary context to understand what you are writing. You should use them for the sake of understanding, if you are to lazy to write it out again.
> >> To me, it doesn't solve the root cause, but actually I can't judge >> this, because I am missing a description of what is really going >> wrong. > > As I've already said, this isn't about solving the root cause. It's > about reducing the impact of damage that's already been done until the > root cause is solved properly. >
My clear vote is No. We shouldn't implement anything which allows bad coding anywhere, just for the sake of having it "solved" now.


File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: PROPERTIES=funky-slots Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com>