| 1 |
On 09/26/2014 09:22 AM, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 2 |
> Dnia 2014-09-22, o godz. 17:57:26 |
| 3 |
> Bertrand Simonnet <bsimonnet@××××××.com> napisał(a): |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> Sounds good :) |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>> Michal, would that work for you ? If so, I'll start on it tomorrow. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> I have mixed feeling about having yet another package.* file but |
| 10 |
> the idea sounds good. However, I'd prefer naming it |
| 11 |
> 'package.bashrc' (since it pretty much points to bashrcs, doesn't it?) |
| 12 |
> and using a new subdirectory like 'bashrc/' instead of re-using 'env/' |
| 13 |
> to avoid confusion. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
That sounds pretty reasonable to me. I really like the idea of using a |
| 16 |
new directory name. When we added package.env support, I wasn't very |
| 17 |
comfortable with re-using the /etc/portage/env directory which was |
| 18 |
already being used for bashrc, but we did it anyway because others |
| 19 |
thought it would be fine. |
| 20 |
-- |
| 21 |
Thanks, |
| 22 |
Zac |
Archives