| 1 |
On Sun, 4 Dec 2016 21:13:23 -0600 |
| 2 |
"A. Wilcox" <awilfox@×××××××××××.org> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 5 |
> Hash: SHA256 |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> On 04/12/16 20:58, Mike Gilbert wrote: |
| 8 |
> > On Sun, Dec 4, 2016 at 6:31 PM, A. Wilcox <awilfox@×××××××××××.org> |
| 9 |
> > wrote: |
| 10 |
> >> Roadmap - ------- |
| 11 |
> >> |
| 12 |
> >> Since the shell environment is flexible, this change can be |
| 13 |
> >> implemented almost immediately; the defaults specified in the |
| 14 |
> >> Gentoo base profile ensure that at worst nothing will immediately |
| 15 |
> >> change. As forks, derivatives, and other organisations change |
| 16 |
> >> the environment variables in their profiles or ``make.conf`` |
| 17 |
> >> files, all updated ebuilds will immediately reflect the changes. |
| 18 |
> >> |
| 19 |
> >> During this, the variables can be added to the EAPI=7 |
| 20 |
> >> specification, and may eventually be added to PMS §11.1. |
| 21 |
> > |
| 22 |
> > It's not clear to me why this should be defined in PMS, especially |
| 23 |
> > if this is going to be a profile variable in make.defaults. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> > |
| 26 |
> > I think we would only need to add it to PMS if you need to package |
| 27 |
> > manager to compute the value based on the running system. Is that |
| 28 |
> > what you had in mind here? If so, you will need to include that |
| 29 |
> > algorithm in your patch. |
| 30 |
> > |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> Thinking on it a little more, that wouldn't be a good way to go. We |
| 33 |
> can't really rely on lsb_release being present, especially if Portage |
| 34 |
> is being run on FreeBSD or a more exotic prefix; sys-apps/lsb-release |
| 35 |
> isn't even installed on my relatively 'normal' amd64 Gentoo Linux |
| 36 |
> machine. Additionally, it wouldn't have the bug URL even if it were |
| 37 |
> present. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
Strictly speaking, it could use $EPREFIX/etc/os-release which has all |
| 40 |
the info you need, is installed by baselayout and doesn't require |
| 41 |
special wrappers to print it. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
Benefits of os-release approach: |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
- distros don't have to override profiles (which can get problematic if |
| 46 |
a distro uses pretty-much standard Gentoo profiles), |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
- works for people with custom profiles. |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
Drawbacks of os-release approach: |
| 51 |
|
| 52 |
- can't do it via profiles, |
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
- doesn't work before baselayout is installed. |
| 55 |
|
| 56 |
The other alternative is to provide an eclass that reads data from |
| 57 |
$EPREFIX/os-release and supplies it to the packages that need it. |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
-- |
| 60 |
Best regards, |
| 61 |
Michał Górny |
| 62 |
<http://dev.gentoo.org/~mgorny/> |
Archives