| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 5 |
> On Sun, 03 Aug 2008 18:52:43 -0700 |
| 6 |
> Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o> wrote: |
| 7 |
>> As a substitute for the previously discussed RESTRICT=live value[1], |
| 8 |
>> I'd now like you to consider an equivalent PROPERTIES=live-sources |
| 9 |
>> setting. By specifying PROPERTIES=live-sources, an ebuild will be |
| 10 |
>> able to indicate that it uses src_unpack() to download sources from |
| 11 |
>> some type of live repository such as cvs, darcs, git, mercurial, or |
| 12 |
>> svn. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> You're using a single value to mean: |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> * include me in some 'live-sources' set |
| 17 |
> * I need some kind of locking in src_unpack |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> At the very least, the two should be separate attributes. But the |
| 20 |
> locking probably shouldn't be an attribute at all -- the 'flock' shell |
| 21 |
> utility can be used instead to get much more fine-grained locking. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Would having the ebuild perform locking be unportable or introduce |
| 25 |
any undesirable complexity? Does it really need to be so |
| 26 |
fine-grained? I don't see flock listed in the spec here [1]. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Zac |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
[1] |
| 31 |
http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/utilities/contents.html |
| 32 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 33 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
iEYEARECAAYFAkiZPLkACgkQ/ejvha5XGaML7ACg9Fuam5ZmwRst/kIsBvmJG8H7 |
| 36 |
vbEAoIOrAZCvijO5yN3PxbufXLQyQB03 |
| 37 |
=kPf6 |
| 38 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives