| 1 |
On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 11:01:19 +0200 |
| 2 |
Patrick Lauer <bugs@××××××××××××××××××××××.org> wrote: |
| 3 |
> Just to pour some oil on the flames - |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> Y'all are aware that paludis can't parse a valid make.conf and does |
| 6 |
> ignore package.keywords at times, yes? |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Yep. We don't claim to or aim to completely support Portage configs. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
> Test case is: |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> FEATURES="strict" # test and stricter fail |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> in make.conf ... if you had the tests you claim others lack that |
| 15 |
> would have been fixed a long time ago. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
No, we just don't bother supporting it. Remember that configs aren't |
| 18 |
part of PMS. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Also note that if you had something like this in package.use: |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
foo/bar baz # monkey |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Portage would until relatively recently (and after that section of PMS |
| 25 |
was written, for the profiles side of it) set USE="baz # monkey". |
| 26 |
Paludis chose to indicate an error rather than accept clearly nonsense |
| 27 |
input. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
There's no PMS violation here -- user configs aren't covered (and if |
| 30 |
you do use a Portage user configuration with Paludis, you get a big fat |
| 31 |
warning saying "this probably won't work, file tickets if you want |
| 32 |
stuff fixed"), and PMS restricts profile use files to behaviour safely |
| 33 |
supported by all EAPI 0 accepting Portage versions. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives