| 1 |
On Tuesday 18 May 2004 19:16, Marius Mauch wrote: |
| 2 |
> And that's exactly the point about local USE flag bloat I posted a few |
| 3 |
> days ago. Why do we need a new flag for this? |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
Like I said, because they are not the same thing. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
> I would compare the |
| 8 |
> descriptions, but I don't find one for hardenedphp in use*.desc :( |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Yup. It seems that I forgot to commit that. It'll be turning up shortly. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
> Actually I don't see the flag anywhere (including the mod_php and php |
| 13 |
> ebuilds). |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
You're looking in the wrong place. Try the php-sapi.eclass. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> If it has to do with security enhancements I think the hardened flag |
| 18 |
> would be a perfect match unless the Gentoo Hardened team is disagreeing |
| 19 |
> completely (and as pappy already asked the same question I don't think |
| 20 |
> so). |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
And what do we do if we add support for any of the other (and non-compatible) |
| 23 |
PHP security patches out there? Renaming this USE flag would seem somewhat |
| 24 |
short-sighted. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
I'm pro-choice, and do not agree with the idea of aggregating USE flags just |
| 27 |
because they sound similar. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Best regards, |
| 30 |
Stu |
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
Stuart Herbert stuart@g.o |
| 33 |
Gentoo Developer http://www.gentoo.org/ |
| 34 |
http://stu.gnqs.org/diary/ |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
GnuPG key id# F9AFC57C available from http://pgp.mit.edu |
| 37 |
Key fingerprint = 31FB 50D4 1F88 E227 F319 C549 0C2F 80BA F9AF C57C |
| 38 |
-- |
Archives