| 1 |
On Fri, 14 Oct 2016 13:05:43 -0400 |
| 2 |
"William L. Thomson Jr." <wlt-ml@××××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> It is some what a moot problem, but I think it would be good to adopt such or |
| 5 |
> similar requirement, maybe in the PMS. Many already follow the -bin suffix now. |
| 6 |
> I just do not believe it is a requirement anywhere. Which if that is the case, |
| 7 |
> I am suggesting it should be. If a package is src_install only, no |
| 8 |
> src_compile, it should be required to have a -bin suffix, or -gbin if self made. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Yeah, I get the intent, but I don't see it being likely we'd ever have |
| 11 |
a real usecase for having both a -bin and a -gbin in tree together. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
If anything, I'd imagine if that case arose, it would manifest itself more as: |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
icedtea-bin + USE=official |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Or similar, given the "deploy binary to system" steps are likely to be |
| 18 |
the same regardless of who built it. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
At best, I'd imagine users who care whether they get "official" binaries |
| 21 |
or "gentoo" binaries would probably prefer to select which as a sort of global policy, |
| 22 |
but that concept is just a doorway to additional complexity. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
So a strong argument would have to be made for being able to "select" |
| 25 |
between "Offical" and "Unofficial" binaries in an automated fashion |
| 26 |
before we go down that road to hell. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
( I wrote an example case of how this could be done, and it quickly |
| 29 |
went pear shaped and I deleted it[1] ) |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
1: https://gist.github.com/kentfredric/c63e42937c90031834c525dcb6de0da8 |
Archives