Archives
Archives
| From: | Mike Gilbert <floppym@g.o> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] ebuild: allow RESTRICT=network-sandbox in ebuilds | ||
| Date: | Wed, 17 Jan 2018 04:32:58 | ||
| Message-Id: | CAJ0EP425DcwkjC-ZpK9d5tw+4=c48M1WuMg_ubv5rLNc5bp57g@mail.gmail.com | ||
| In Reply to: | [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] ebuild: allow RESTRICT=network-sandbox in ebuilds by Mike Frysinger |
||
| 1 | On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 4:46 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 | > From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@××××××××.org> |
| 3 | > |
| 4 | > Some ebuilds are a bit hard to fix their use of the network in src |
| 5 | > phases, so allow them to disable things. This allows us to turn off |
| 6 | > access by default and for the vast majority while we work out how to |
| 7 | > fix the few broken packages. |
| 8 | |
| 9 | If we are going to allow network sandboxing to be disabled in |
| 10 | individual ebuilds, we should also allow the other sandboxes to be |
| 11 | disabled for the same reasons. sys-apps/sandbox has been notoriously |
| 12 | buggy, for example. |
| 13 | |
| 14 | Also, valid RESTRICT values are specified in PMS, so this really |
| 15 | belongs in an a new EAPI. |
| Subject | Author |
|---|---|
| Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] ebuild: allow RESTRICT=network-sandbox in ebuilds | Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o> |
| Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] ebuild: allow RESTRICT=network-sandbox in ebuilds | Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o> |
| Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] ebuild: allow RESTRICT=network-sandbox in ebuilds | "Michał Górny" <mgorny@g.o> |