From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1O2s9H-0008IF-Oa for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 20:28:24 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4DED9E0AA1; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 20:28:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wy0-f195.google.com (mail-wy0-f195.google.com [74.125.82.195]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EC5FE0A91 for ; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 20:28:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wyj26 with SMTP id 26so231123wyj.10 for ; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 13:28:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:date:from:to:subject :message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer:mime-version :content-type; bh=bKxaGZQKgWcMO0AuVTkQISOrMGJW9EmbDr1oh9CRAIA=; b=pJrtDA9CdUhcJ4lvaIfEADTfMuTyn8zQm7oFOHmTzAakRZyXS/Ej3L0dwFb587KSLC xvTPaEQ0ceAvlQyiJL6z+Yq+fsUL7ivykx09UoQfx5i7wJR1Qymrvb9LIie7KVOuaon4 xWGuAsWJNwT2FUI8CRqXgtrCl9HtPKArRZLew= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer :mime-version:content-type; b=vLXC27Z5Caw26oGEOCdtBdgcdpyDkxKDZedHBLPthEuOdjflNoVQ2QKtqueORLzh9w ZkIgSptcCyeTBd7li5tngnLwaWprXDY2Mh8phTH3iikNnQ64m3JIJ6W3C/8jBn7q0zBo sgWhXR0Qs6TvISe43t/fOfXSzrJ6p+F7YFDm4= Received: by 10.216.156.193 with SMTP id m43mr2523593wek.11.1271449693764; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 13:28:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from snowmobile ([92.24.210.0]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id t27sm23650496wbc.17.2010.04.16.13.28.13 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Fri, 16 Apr 2010 13:28:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 21:28:06 +0100 From: Ciaran McCreesh To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] perl eclass review - EAPI=3 + new helper eclass Message-ID: <20100416212806.7bc6b307@snowmobile> In-Reply-To: References: <20100330111154.GA28735@veller.net> <4BB536DC.8090405@gentoo.org> <4BBB7FDE.7090306@gentoo.org> <4BC3A301.3040400@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.4 (GTK+ 2.18.5; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA1; boundary="Sig_/G7ZCnDV3HuWZQ8g2XFo04uR"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: 10d9b724-ea2c-4036-807f-9b5a09e17a36 X-Archives-Hash: 8cf68cca4d50767ac38a1e39e871e422 --Sig_/G7ZCnDV3HuWZQ8g2XFo04uR Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 16:23:48 -0400 James Cloos wrote: > OK. Let me rephrase. Portage does not need to validate local > changes. Sure it does. If it doesn't, and your local changes affect metadata, horrible things happen. > If a user uses a local eclass to override one in portage or in some > remote overlay s/he follows, it is his/er responsibility to update > it when the original undergoes major renovation. Users aren't responsible... --=20 Ciaran McCreesh --Sig_/G7ZCnDV3HuWZQ8g2XFo04uR Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkvIyFkACgkQ96zL6DUtXhGA/QCfR6g9SRfYUK32tkumX8PxSaNI jGAAoMQgR6lDsHs1+66Gjwcx8YD0kUyq =QRoV -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/G7ZCnDV3HuWZQ8g2XFo04uR--