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 4.60) (envelope-from <gentoo-dev+bounces-13029-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@gentoo.org>) id 1FiV47-0005Ks-5e for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 23 May 2006 11:28:43 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.6) with SMTP id k4NBS3ss031004; Tue, 23 May 2006 11:28:03 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k4NBOR4n023329 for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Tue, 23 May 2006 11:24:27 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC6C164482 for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Tue, 23 May 2006 11:24:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 09452-17 for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Tue, 23 May 2006 11:24:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gentoo.org (unknown [84.29.235.69]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31B356437D for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Tue, 23 May 2006 11:24:20 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 13:25:39 +0200 From: Harald van =?utf-8?Q?D=C4=B3k?= <truedfx@gentoo.org> To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Moving virtual/eject to new-style virtual Message-ID: <20060523112539.GA5873@gentoo.org> References: <200605231238.56089@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org> List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@gentoo.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@gentoo.org> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@gentoo.org> List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org> X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200605231238.56089@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.131 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.468, BAYES_00=-2.599] X-Spam-Score: -2.131 X-Spam-Level: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by robin.gentoo.org id k4NBS3ue031004 X-Archives-Salt: 406e33af-9bce-4b8c-a8e7-49edf9613d0c X-Archives-Hash: a449f04bd078f64e937cb45145be63b9 On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 12:38:55PM +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Petten=F2 wro= te: > So, right now virtual/eject is the old-style virtual that gets listed i= n=20 > virtuals file in the profiles, defaulting to sys-apps/eject that is Lin= ux=20 > only. >=20 > I would like to move it to a new-style virtual to make it simpler to ha= ndlef=20 > or other platforms, having the deps this way: >=20 > || ( kernel_linux? ( sys-apps/eject ) sys-block/unieject kernel_FreeBSD= ? (=20 > sys-apps/eject-bsd ) ) >=20 > this way when used with a kernel different by Linux it defaults to unie= ject=20 > (my reimplementation) that using libcdio would be simpler to port. >=20 > Thoughts? (I've been meaning to ask this for a while, it's not specific to virtual/eject.) How does it help? New-style virtuals have several disadvantages, and the usual advantages of new-style virtuals don't apply here. If it actually provides real benefits, then no objections from me, but how is this easier to maintain than a "virtual/eject sys-block/unieject" entry in the default-bsd profile? --=20 gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list