| 1 |
On Thu, 2014-01-09 at 11:15 -0800, Alec Warner wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> I think the opposition to this idea primarily falls on reliability. |
| 6 |
> There have been a number of hacks to portage over the years to keep it |
| 7 |
> functioning during upgrades of itself, even down to the non-standard |
| 8 |
> place where its .py files are stored (/usr/lib/portage/pym?) So the |
| 9 |
> real question is when we move to a plug-in architecture, how do we |
| 10 |
> add, remove, upgrade the plugins without breaking the actual package |
| 11 |
> manager? |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> -A |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Well, a good point. But, this is the sync module, not some of the |
| 18 |
critical pkg installation code. Another thing, once a module is loaded, |
| 19 |
the source file could be removed and/or replaced without adverse effects |
| 20 |
depending what the code does. That is not always the case though. |
| 21 |
Portage/emerge does not sync and install ebuilds simultaneously, so that |
| 22 |
problem is not a concern. Also a lock file could be used to prevent |
| 23 |
another emerge process form interfering with an ongoing sync run. Just |
| 24 |
like it does now for merging completed builds. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Brian Dolbec <dolsen@g.o> |
Archives