| 1 |
Jon Nelson wrote: |
| 2 |
>While I don't understand everything about gentoo, let me make a statement |
| 3 |
>and ask a question I hope isn't too, ah, caustic. |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>Shouldn't a new file, say 0.12.5-r2, be created and used? |
| 6 |
>Isn't that why there are different files for different releases? |
| 7 |
>Why have a 0.12.5-r1 at all, then? |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
>I personally much prefer that once an ebuild is committed, it not change. |
| 10 |
>If changes need to be made, shouldn't a new ebuild file be made? |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
>Just my opinion, but I feel it has merit. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
>If changes are made to an ebuild file, and I run rsync, sure, I get |
| 15 |
>the updated ebuild. However, does portage understand that it's a "new" |
| 16 |
>ebuild? |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
I agree with this. When you fix an ebuild, a new one should be created so |
| 19 |
that users know that something was fixed, or at least updated. It also |
| 20 |
wouldn't be a bad idea to remove broken ebuilds after they've been fixed. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
kabau |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
"UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that |
| 26 |
would also stop you from doing clever things." --Doug Gwyn |
Archives