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 1RKfaR-0006Qe-CE for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 31 Oct 2011 00:18:47 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 07AA021C037; Mon, 31 Oct 2011 00:18:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05E9C21C028 for ; Mon, 31 Oct 2011 00:18:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vapier.localnet (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C9D81B4009 for ; Mon, 31 Oct 2011 00:18:03 +0000 (UTC) From: Mike Frysinger Organization: wh0rd.org To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] portability.eclass: dead egethome, egetshell, is-login-disabled funcs ? Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 20:17:47 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.1.0-rc4; KDE/4.6.5; x86_64; ; ) References: <4EADD0CF.70601@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <4EADD0CF.70601@gentoo.org> 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; boundary="nextPart4823520.6fYuJL0ork"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201110302017.48281.vapier@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 17a0f4c6-112b-4033-b282-c1405a7b4832 X-Archives-Hash: d3d21bc61ac9967f8c4cefca2bb98f92 --nextPart4823520.6fYuJL0ork Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sunday 30 October 2011 18:33:51 Petteri R=E4ty wrote: > On 27.10.2011 2.40, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > i can't see any ebuild/eclass using egethome, egetshell, > > is-login-disabled from portability.eclass. anyone have a reason for > > keeping these before i punt them ? >=20 > Breaking overlays. Isn't the standing policy still to not break > backwards compatibility as long as an eclass exists? do you have any actual examples ? =2Dmike --nextPart4823520.6fYuJL0ork Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAABAgAGBQJOreksAAoJEEFjO5/oN/WBgIQQALgfOA/lczhsuy95559PmCx1 jcLNJ0KllqsP8YZGVjE4z5RfpvTAvx8DR4ceF0046YNuHHMMaJZHimrUctuJkPS8 y1yI1MEsBHR8ru/8/k4oBctDs2OetRewg8RSiAObfIgVdMRDpahJKbDzI9h1gCGK 4KI5wd8P4n2bwqZM+D6Qq6M0Kj7/vndoQ9knuCQ6iGB98Pz6ke4zlJalvw8bTPiS 0KdpjpHJsF9/VE7hi8hhb29uCnVH51hKWgZmBS1bYcey3+You+/FZaq1ApwmHinl PLdPX2+IGHwqshei7QEKEgaQojBxfsEWIMsZfRXke2EAF88n4umQfPzwOyAmOau9 yUsIeUbghDy9NWliIMuue4My2wS56ELq8SO+S9N/qNjQ9hNnM0Mi2so7yLuogOvF wf8FualAo82XdSKluMN49CtqAXcv5tS9Jb1j5gyVVcsTxMqgSBLjTWQlUstWBRSW daTa4I+8Ce6QAR/ZI6ETdrJKMH0Cb6CaIaR0L+gYSiR0mbYarzOKJUNHiUDHnojC 1/Pp6oU1FPq7mml6Cjmfwmz4oN9hHbNVfHBFqxvNcE36J43yMzCOxhS0MwMfFY5v Z6GwGj16IO6XZANLyV8U14J7x99mLfBRkbpv+OHCQjpEPMwd1Aa7SD/ipZZQZHcW e+3jhM+v9MX+i28Q8k+i =cNVS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart4823520.6fYuJL0ork--