| 1 |
Anthony G. Basile: |
| 2 |
> On 09/06/14 12:12, hasufell wrote: |
| 3 |
>> Anthony G. Basile: |
| 4 |
>>>> And when you do ask, is a package that's "provided" installed, and if |
| 5 |
>>>> so, what's its metadata? |
| 6 |
>>>> |
| 7 |
>>> When the package is installed, that data should have been cached. |
| 8 |
>>> |
| 9 |
>> Afaik there is nothing "cached" if you put stuff in package.provided. |
| 10 |
>> It's a terrible hack, unless I missed something. |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> I wasn't sure what Ciaran was talking about there. If its hacky, then |
| 14 |
> we certainly don't want to standardize it in the GLEP. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Well, you have to to define what tools can expect from |
| 18 |
provided/installed packages. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
That means either say "you cannot expect anything, because there might |
| 21 |
or might not be metadata" or say "you can expect metadata for any |
| 22 |
provided/installed package" in which case package.provided feature has |
| 23 |
to be removed from portage. |
Archives