From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gbevin@theleaf.be>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-14) on finch.gentoo.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.1 required=5.0 tests=DMARC_NONE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0
Received: from bigglesworth.mail.be.easynet.net (bigglesworth.mail.be.easynet.net [212.100.160.67])
	by chiba.3jane.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 495C31925A
	for <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>; Wed,  5 Dec 2001 22:54:17 -0600 (CST)
Received: from 213-193-176-79.adsl.easynet.be ([213.193.176.79])
	by bigglesworth.mail.be.easynet.net with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1)
	id 16BqXl-00086D-00
	for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Thu, 06 Dec 2001 05:53:57 +0100
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] emerge system through sandbox
From: Geert Bevin <gbevin@theleaf.be>
To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Evolution/1.0 (Preview Release)
Date: 06 Dec 2001 05:54:08 +0100
Message-Id: <1007614449.709.0.camel@inspiron.theleaf.office>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Sender: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org
Errors-To: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.6
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev-request@gentoo.org?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev>,
	<mailto:gentoo-dev-request@gentoo.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Id: Developer discussion list <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev>,
	<mailto:gentoo-dev-request@gentoo.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gentoo.org/pipermail/gentoo-dev/>
X-Archives-Salt: b30705e6-5173-4f1e-b42b-873b45c4bd44
X-Archives-Hash: 5c5fe570e1a9b6db289032f4fd2f9dae

On Thu, 2001-12-06 at 05:31, Martin Schlemmer wrote:
> Isnt it a test by these packages to check if the user have
> write permissions to those dirs, and can thus install them ?

In fact it's these situations that were the basis for me not to want to
return an error by the sandbox if it detects invalid accesses. The
developer/user should just be notified of the presence. If the installer
of the package doesn't consider it as a fatal error, but simple as a
notification of the state of the system, the merge should simply proceed
imho. I could add something which makes it possible to notify to sandbox
of predicted/expected failures, which in their turn are then not printed
to the regular user.

What do you think of this?

-- 
Geert Bevin
the Leaf sprl/bvba
"Use what you need"           Pierre Theunisstraat 1/47
http://www.theleaf.be         1030 Brussels
gbevin@theleaf.be             Tel & Fax +32 2 241 19 98