Gentoo Archives: gentoo-pms

From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com>
To: gentoo-pms@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-pms] Re: EAPI 5
Date: Tue, 01 May 2012 08:41:25
Message-Id: 20120501093841.655b4ab5@googlemail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-pms] Re: EAPI 5 by "Andreas K. Huettel"
1 On Tue, 1 May 2012 01:02:48 +0200
2 "Andreas K. Huettel" <dilfridge@g.o> wrote:
3 > > Can you enumerate every possible way the files will be used, both in
4 > > terms of syntax and intended effect?
5 >
6 > In the same way as package.use.mask and package.use.force.
7 >
8 > > Can you provide assurances that it
9 > > can't also be (ab)used to do other things not on your list?
10 >
11 > Which list?
12
13 The "In the same way as package.use.mask and package.use.force." one.
14
15 > Of course someone will come up with other creative ideas how to
16 > (ab)use it
17
18 That's a problem. We need to make sure that that can't happen.
19
20 > > Can you demonstrate that introducing this in an EAPI won't require
21 > > upping profile EAPIs,
22 >
23 > No. Teach me, please.
24
25 I don't think it's doable...
26
27 > > and that users whose package mangler doesn't do
28 > > EAPI 5 won't run into problems with it?
29 >
30 > Well. PMS describes the files in a profile directory. If
31 > * we introduce a new file via PMS that was not in there before,
32 > * and another package manager accesses that file but expects
33 > different information there not corresponding to our new definition,
34 > that package manager should be considered broken because it is not
35 > adhering to previous PMS revisions. So?
36
37 What happens if a user uses an EAPI 4 ebuild with an EAPI 4 package
38 manager when the ebuild in question would be hit by your new files,
39 which the package manager doesn't know about yet?
40
41 --
42 Ciaran McCreesh

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-pms] Re: EAPI 5 "Andreas K. Huettel" <dilfridge@g.o>