| 1 |
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 11:57:06AM -0400, Alec Warner wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 11:47 AM, Michael Orlitzky <mjo@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> > On 03/29/2018 11:28 AM, Alec Warner wrote: |
| 5 |
> > > |
| 6 |
> > > Is there any particular reason we need to remove them? |
| 7 |
> > > |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > The PMS says that empty directories are undefined, so the portage |
| 10 |
> > behavior of installing them and leaving them alone leads to |
| 11 |
> > incompatibilities. Ebuilds rely on the portage behavior, and if another |
| 12 |
> > PM (within its rights) deletes them, then the package breaks with the |
| 13 |
> > non-portage PM. |
| 14 |
> > |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> So we could simply change the PMS to keep the empty directories? |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> Why is removing them *better* is my question. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Right, I am not aware why PMS has left this explicitly undefined. Have |
| 21 |
read through https://bugs.gentoo.org/644366 but there's no hint on why, |
| 22 |
too. I appreciate mjo's proposal. I think it would be good for ebuild |
| 23 |
maintainer to have a switch "empty dirs are ok by default". The |
| 24 |
disagreement seems to be based on a prejudice and distrust towards |
| 25 |
upstreams' build systems. |
Archives