From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EIcaU-0008PF-Ev for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 23 Sep 2005 01:42:54 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id j8N1YxP4018243; Fri, 23 Sep 2005 01:34:59 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id j8N1Vwrs010986 for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2005 01:31:58 GMT Received: from zh034158.ppp.dion.ne.jp ([222.3.34.158] helo=opteron246.suzuki-stubbs.home) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.43) id 1EIcVw-0006T4-Lw for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Fri, 23 Sep 2005 01:38:12 +0000 Received: by opteron246.suzuki-stubbs.home (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E11EC10380C; Fri, 23 Sep 2005 10:38:17 +0900 (JST) From: Jason Stubbs To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] "Commercial" software in portage Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2005 10:38:15 +0900 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.91 References: <20050921172801.42BBEF5C20@mail.deploylinux.net> <20050922202931.GD10187@nightcrawler> <1127423354.24269.89.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> In-Reply-To: <1127423354.24269.89.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart3840825.eiP50b521P"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200509231038.17738.jstubbs@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 6b87e7e8-2d9f-44bc-acc9-36aa8b44faf4 X-Archives-Hash: 060b23831d2a03a8f40a73ab856d09ef --nextPart3840825.eiP50b521P Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Friday 23 September 2005 06:09, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > it would be a good idea to give the user some way of knowing that a > package requires some additional purchased (or otherwise obtained) > portion that is not a distfile/tarball.=20 It would be a good idea, indeed. RESTRICT=3D"purchase" or somesuch parallel= to=20 RESTRICT=3D"fetch" would solve this just as well. However, whenever adding= =20 new stuff like this, as a portage developer, I always ask what use of it=20 can be made by portage? I can't see anything other than passing the=20 information to a user interface to blink some text at the user... Overloading RESTRICT=3D"fetch" to include this case seems like the best met= hod=20 to me. Really, what's the difference between fetch-restricted and "purchase =2Drestricted"? From a portage point of view, they both require the user to= =20 dance through some hoops before getting access and there's not really any=20 important difference beyond that. So, if RESTRICT=3D"fetch" were to be overloaded, there is the issue of both= =20 fetch-restricted and non-fetch-restricted downloads in the one package. I=20 would think this issue exists already for some packages. How is it dealt=20 with at the moment? =2D-=20 Jason Stubbs --nextPart3840825.eiP50b521P Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBDM1yJxvWNPsk/ZP4RAp1CAJ9rrYN+CY6dJ4cjjwxOubVqKZjU+wCfQvHP BZAM4GtNXNlpMSHcv14/gXo= =QOup -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart3840825.eiP50b521P-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list