Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [rfc] variable naming for marking binaries as QA ignorable

[Kevin F. Quinn (Gentoo)]

On Sun, 5 Mar 2006 20:46:25 -0500
Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o> wrote:

> On Sunday 05 March 2006 19:48, Kevin F. Quinn (Gentoo) wrote:
> > This could be done via the profiles, perhaps - package.qa, something
> > like package.mask/use/keywords:
>
> i hate such things ... imo this information should stay in the ebuild
> and nowhere else ...

I was thinking that the data would be "owned" by the QA team rather
than the package maintainers.  I appreciate your pov, however.

There may be benefit in being able to set it differently for each
profile; for example a hardened (PaX NOELFRELOCS) profile might always
have QA_TEXTRELS set empty (i.e. anything with TEXTRELs would fail to
install, as it'd fail to run anyway).  However package maintainers in
general aren't going to like yet more special-casing for the
non-mainstream profiles.


Anyway, that aside - if you're going for a QA_<feature>_<arch> naming,
you could use QA_<feature> where there's no arch difference, supplying
others where necessary such that if QA_<feature>_<arch> exists
it takes precedence over QA_<feature>. Otherwise you'll end up
adding a whole set of variables to all affected ebuilds. Admittedly
there aren't that many of them so it may not be worth the hassle.

Heh - here's another idea for you to hate:

QA_OVERRIDE="EXECSTACK=...
             x86? ( TEXTRELS=... )"

-- 
Kevin F. Quinn