Gentoo Archives: gentoo-pms

From: Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o>
To: gentoo-pms@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-pms] Clarifications on dosym behaviour
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 19:23:25
In Reply to: [gentoo-pms] Clarifications on dosym behaviour by Ralph Sennhauser
>>>>> On Fri, 27 Jan 2012, Ralph Sennhauser wrote:
> Just recently Portage started to emit "* QA Notice: dosym target > omits basename ..." for "dosym /path_to_file/file /some_other_path/"
> The PMS says:
> dosym: Creates a symbolic link named as for its second parameter, > pointing to the first. If the directory containing the new link does > not exist, creates it. Failure behaviour is EAPI dependent as per > section
> The part "Creates a symbolic link named as for its second parameter" > could qualify it for requiring a basename.
> As the behaviour of an implicit basename of the second parameter was > used for a long time I wonder if the PMS needs to be updated and > clarify the dosym behaviour or if this new QA warning can be seen as > a long overdue implementation of the intended behaviour.
This has been discussed in bug 379899 and the conclusion was that PMS specifies the intended behaviour. At the moment a directory argument produces only a QA warning in Portage. I think the long-term plan is to turn it into an error though.


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-pms] Clarifications on dosym behaviour Ralph Sennhauser <sera@g.o>