| 1 |
On Tue, 1 May 2012 11:01:57 +0200 |
| 2 |
"Andreas K. Huettel" <dilfridge@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> Am Dienstag 01 Mai 2012, 10:38:41 schrieb Ciaran McCreesh: |
| 4 |
> > > Well. PMS describes the files in a profile directory. If |
| 5 |
> > > * we introduce a new file via PMS that was not in there before, |
| 6 |
> > > * and another package manager accesses that file but expects |
| 7 |
> > > different information there not corresponding to our new |
| 8 |
> > > definition, that package manager should be considered broken |
| 9 |
> > > because it is not adhering to previous PMS revisions. So? |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> > What happens if a user uses an EAPI 4 ebuild with an EAPI 4 package |
| 12 |
> > manager when the ebuild in question would be hit by your new files, |
| 13 |
> > which the package manager doesn't know about yet? |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Err, nothing? The useflags remain available and switchable as before, |
| 16 |
> no difference regarding useflags between stable / not stable? |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
What is the impact of this, then? Does it mean users will start to see |
| 19 |
lots of "masked" errors that they should not be seeing? |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives