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