| 1 |
On 2014.02.28 14:44, Samuli Suominen wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> On 28/02/14 16:18, Tom Wijsman wrote: |
| 4 |
> > On Fri, 28 Feb 2014 15:28:30 +0200 |
| 5 |
> > Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@g.o> wrote: |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> >> It would be very helpful if INSTALL_MASK could be overriden from |
| 8 |
> an |
| 9 |
> >> ebuild, ... |
| 10 |
> > What is the intended goal? Can you give an example? |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> - User has INSTALL_MASK="/lib/systemd" |
| 13 |
> - Ebuild has INSTALL_MASK_OVERRIDE="/lib/systemd/systemd-udevd |
| 14 |
> /lib/systemd/network" |
| 15 |
> - Portage's default is to respect ebuild first, then users setting, |
| 16 |
> unless he changes INSTALL_MASK_ORDER to respect his |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> I completely agree using INSTALL_MASK is 100% responsibility of the |
| 19 |
> user |
| 20 |
> setting it, it's like blind 'rm -f', but some people |
| 21 |
> don't agree and keep attacking me. |
| 22 |
> I'm using the word attacking because it's constant, relentless, |
| 23 |
> repeating and I don't see an end to it. I believe Poly-C just |
| 24 |
> proofed that point in this thread. |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Samuli, |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
You can't win this one. |
| 32 |
Consider ln -s /dev/null /lib/systemd/ |
| 33 |
or whatever. It achieves the same thing and you can't override it |
| 34 |
unless you also remove the symlink. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
INSTALL_MASK means |
| 37 |
I_KNOW_WHAT_IM_DOING_AND_AM_PREPARED_TO_KEEP_THE_PIECES |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
systemd and the components it has sucked in has become the centre of a |
| 40 |
religious war with Zelots on both sides. |
| 41 |
All an INSTALL_MASK_OVERRIDE would do is escalate the war. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
-- |
| 44 |
Regards, |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
Roy Bamford |
| 47 |
(Neddyseagoon) a member of |
| 48 |
elections |
| 49 |
gentoo-ops |
| 50 |
forum-mods |
| 51 |
trustees |
Archives