| 1 |
On Sunday 07 September 2003 23:41, Jon Portnoy wrote: |
| 2 |
> You haven't explained why it's not sufficient. |
| 3 |
Read again. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
> > Again examples from the actual tree, so you can try yourself: |
| 6 |
> > 1. emerge ezmlm and emerge ezmlm-idx |
| 7 |
> > providing slightly different funtionality they will overwrite each other |
| 8 |
> > (instead of blocking each other) |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Bug. Is it filed? |
| 11 |
Bug in portage! portage is the one that allows such integrity mess. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> So we don't have enough manpower. |
| 14 |
Thats true for many open-source project. Some of them just try to get |
| 15 |
organized more efficiently and succeed in doing so. |
| 16 |
So, maybe there is a more appropriate organization model for gentoo? |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
> > And to me its clear why it is like that (at least on reason): |
| 19 |
i meant to say: (at least one reason) |
| 20 |
sorry. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> So basically you're saying portage shouldn't install software. |
| 23 |
I say: |
| 24 |
portage must respect my system inegrity! |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
> So we should never be able to tweak config files et al in an ebuild? |
| 27 |
an ebuild may freely modify its own config files. |
| 28 |
modification of config files not belonging to the ebuild should be done via an |
| 29 |
already suggested, secure abstraction, lets say a function like: |
| 30 |
changeconf phph.ini "line to add to phpini" |
| 31 |
portage could then intercept, respecting the suggested CONFIG_EXCLUDE or other |
| 32 |
user settings, or, if no user setting is the way, go to apply the change. |
| 33 |
This way it would be impossible for the ebuild to wipe php.ini. |
| 34 |
Also the user, via CONFIG_EXCLUDE, may completely switch of editing of php.ini |
| 35 |
by ebuilds. On the other hand, if the user doesnt care, the ebuild is free to |
| 36 |
add this line to php.ini. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
Jan |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
-- |
| 42 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives