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 1EKX0C-0004XG-Dn for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 28 Sep 2005 08:09:20 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id j8S80pUL003776; Wed, 28 Sep 2005 08:00:51 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 j8S7wWw2011322 for ; Wed, 28 Sep 2005 07:58:32 GMT Received: from cpe-65-26-255-237.wi.res.rr.com ([65.26.255.237] helo=nightcrawler) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.43) id 1EKWwf-0004BJ-Mv for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Wed, 28 Sep 2005 08:05:41 +0000 Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 03:05:35 -0500 From: Brian Harring To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: [gentoo-dev] deprecation of SANDBOX_DISABLED Message-ID: <20050928080535.GK30337@nightcrawler> 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; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="TKDEsImF70pdVIl+" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-Archives-Salt: 13b0cc07-71ef-4ecc-a7ab-dce8a5b9612b X-Archives-Hash: 157c2be3233a194fb78cfad2c74e0c7c --TKDEsImF70pdVIl+ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hola. Subject says it all; SANDBOX_DISABLED functions as (essentially)=20 RESTRICT=3D"sandbox", except sandbox is left on for pkg_setup . This is pretty much redundant, considering it's usage. People stick=20 it in the global scope; if you _must_ turn off the sandbox for a=20 specific phase, use SANDBOX_ON=3D0/1 instead. If you need to disable=20 sandbox across the board, restrict=3D"sandbox" is your friend. Since there are still ebuilds in the tree that would be schmooked by=20 it, it's not going to hit in the coming version, but I'd expect it to=20 be dead next version after unless people have a really good reason why=20 it should live on. So... thoughts? Yes it's minor, but it's a matter of cleaning=20 up/simplifying portage code, and removing redundancy. ~harring --TKDEsImF70pdVIl+ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDOk7PvdBxRoA3VU0RAkokAKDQhsC1wy167HzIw4VUbX/y3gcW6QCfSv1f Uvl9dNWGqvZR7KsjXPtYV10= =jkha -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --TKDEsImF70pdVIl+-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list