| 1 |
Kristian Fiskerstrand <k_f@g.o> writes: |
| 2 |
> inherited eclasses. having a whitelist in place and die if eclass is not |
| 3 |
> updated to handle it solves it. |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> Thoughts? comments? cookies? threats? |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
Wouldn't a blacklist be more practical than a whitelist? |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
root# cat /usr/portage/profiles/eclass.eapi.mask |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
fooutils.eclass >=6 |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
The problem seems infrequent enough that a blacklist is sufficient, like |
| 14 |
all the *.mask files in /usr/portage/profiles. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
The whitelist places a large testing burden on eclass authors on each |
| 17 |
EAPI bump, where 99% of the time there won't be any issue to fix. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Erik |
Archives