Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: POSIX capability in Gentoo

[Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@googlemail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1368 bytes --]

On Tue, 2 Aug 2011 17:29:29 -0700
Brian Harring <ferringb@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 02, 2011 at 06:39:18PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Tue, 02 Aug 2011 13:36:12 -0400
> > Jonathan Callen <abcd@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > > That statement needs one more qualification: "and doesn't use
> > > portage". Portage will (by default) remove files on uninstall
> > > even if they *do not* match the checksum recorded in the vdb.
> > > This implies that most people will *not* see any issues due to
> > > something other than the package manager modifying the files
> > > behind the package manager's back.
> > 
> > Ugh, seriously? When did that happen? That's a massive change to how
> > VDB is supposed to work.
> 
> That's been in place a long while; pkgcore has done it from day one 
> also.
> 
> That's not a "massive change" to vdb behaviour either; file
> collisions aren't supposed to occur, as such ownership of the file is
> basically guranteed back to a single package.  Throw in
> CONFIG_PROTECT for adjusting the behaviour, and you have a far more
> preferable norm than "lets just leave a shit ton of .pyc/.pyo on the
> fs".

It is a massive change, since if the feature is there then people don't
feel bad about writing lousy pkg_ functions that leave a load
of .pyc / .pyo files all over the place.

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]