| 1 |
On Fri, 18 Nov 2005 09:01:38 -0600 |
| 2 |
Brian Harring <ferringb@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 07:36:05PM -0800, Zac Medico wrote: |
| 5 |
> > Okay, I wrote a small patch that handles everything supported by |
| 6 |
> > /etc/portage except bashrc (package.mask, package.unmask, |
| 7 |
> > package.keywords, package.use, mirrors, categories). I tested it |
| 8 |
> > by moving /etc/portage/package* into /etc/portage/includes/test/ |
| 9 |
> > and it seems to have behaved expectedly. Feedback is welcome and |
| 10 |
> > appreciated. ;) |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Feedback? Well, I don't like it mainly. :) |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> This makes portage go looking in two different locations for |
| 15 |
> overrides; I know from looking through the code, |
| 16 |
> /etc/portage/package.* overrides the includes, but users won't. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Well, the original proposal would "fix" that. Actually it might be |
| 19 |
worth to implement this (optionally) in the grab* functions directly. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
> Configuration in two seperate locations of the same thing is usually |
| 22 |
> a bad idea (exempting global configuration, user configuration, which |
| 23 |
> this is not). It's not intuitive, mainly. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
I disagree. It's mainly a matter of personal preference. If we stick |
| 26 |
with the two locations could also make them mutually exclusive. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
> I'd argue for extending the existing files syntax rather then this |
| 29 |
> tbh, tag in a source command makes a bit more sense to me. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
I strongly object against this. Having a "source" command for the shlex |
| 32 |
parsed files is one thing, having it for plain data files is simply |
| 33 |
wrong. I'm definitely against adding a "language" into these files. |
| 34 |
Also it kinda prevents us to support PQAs (partially qualified |
| 35 |
atoms) some day as there might be a app-foo/source package. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
> Plus side, with a source command, you just comment it out and you've |
| 38 |
> disabled that import. With your solution, have to remove the file |
| 39 |
> from the directory. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
See above about "personal preference". |
| 42 |
Also what's easier: |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
- $EDITOR /etc/portage/package.foo |
| 45 |
- # find line that includes the file you don't want anymore |
| 46 |
- # comment that line |
| 47 |
- # save file and exit editor |
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
- cd /etc/portage/package.foo |
| 50 |
- mv somefile .somefile |
| 51 |
|
| 52 |
(the second one I'm referring to my idea, not Zacks patch which I |
| 53 |
haven't really checked) |
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
Marius |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
-- |
| 58 |
Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub |
| 59 |
|
| 60 |
In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be |
| 61 |
Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better. |
Archives