| 1 |
On Mon, 20 Jul 2009 05:52:30 +0100 |
| 2 |
Steven J Long <slong@××××××××××××××××××.uk> wrote: |
| 3 |
> Hmm given that this relies on profile.bashrc, in specification terms |
| 4 |
> one would have to ensure that http://bugs.gentoo.org/202631 (which |
| 5 |
> was recently raised in #-council) were resolved. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
No, because as you've repeatedly been told, profile.bashrc lies outside |
| 8 |
of the specification precisely to allow the kind of Portage-internals |
| 9 |
trickery that's being discussed here. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> OFC for that to happen, the spec needs to acknowledge that bashrc's |
| 12 |
> exist so that downstream can use them in overlays, irrespective of |
| 13 |
> the user's choice of package-mangler. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
If profile.bashrc were to be specified, none of this would be legal, |
| 16 |
since it would have to restrict the contents to portable code. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
-- |
| 19 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives