1 |
On 05/20/2016 07:01 AM, Michał Górny wrote: |
2 |
> Hello, |
3 |
> |
4 |
> Sometime around a year ago, I started working on extending INSTALL_MASK |
5 |
> to support well-defined locations. The work was never finished, and I |
6 |
> just found my old specification for it. I've cleaned it up a bit, |
7 |
> and extended it into a complete GLEP covering INSTALL_MASK [1]. |
8 |
> |
9 |
> Please review the specification provided. The basic goal is to provide |
10 |
> an ability to use INSTALL_MASK alike USE flags -- with path groups that |
11 |
> are well-defined and described in the repository. |
12 |
> |
13 |
> [1]:https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/User:MGorny/GLEP:INSTALL_MASK |
14 |
> |
15 |
I'm totally in favor of this. The '@' prefix idea from your other mail |
16 |
makes sense, too. Having the repo config file in addition to a custom |
17 |
/etc/portage/install.mask file (for creating your own groups) is the |
18 |
most robust way to do this imo. How would we handle namespace clashes, |
19 |
though? For example, let's say the repo has this: |
20 |
|
21 |
[bash-completion] |
22 |
path=/usr/share/bash-completion/* |
23 |
desc=bash completion files |
24 |
|
25 |
...and the user has this in their install.mask file: |
26 |
|
27 |
[bash-completion] |
28 |
path=/some/other/path |
29 |
desc=some other description |
30 |
|
31 |
...then their make.conf has INSTALL_MASK="-@bash-completion" or something. |
32 |
|
33 |
Should the package manager add the user-supplied path to the existing |
34 |
"bash-completion" mask group? Should it output an error? Prefix every |
35 |
group name in the user's install.mask with "user_"? |
36 |
|
37 |
Otherwise this is a fantastic idea. I'm new to hacking on Portage but if |
38 |
you have the time and/or patience I'd like to take part in hacking on this. |
39 |
|
40 |
-- |
41 |
Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer |
42 |
OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net |
43 |
fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C 1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6 |