Re: [gentoo-dev] Calling die in a subshell

[Tom Wijsman <TomWij@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1455 bytes --]

On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 18:16:32 +0200
Ulrich Mueller <ulm@gentoo.org> wrote:

> >>>>> On Sat, 15 Jun 2013, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> 
> > The devmanual warns that calling die in a subshell does not work.
> 
> > http://devmanual.gentoo.org/ebuild-writing/error-handling/index.html
> 
> > This warning has been obsolete for some time; modern versions of
> > Portage handle die in a subshell just fine.
> 
> > In fact, at least a couple of eclasses rely on this behavior. For
> > example, python-r1 uses subshells created by multiprocessing.eclass
> > to implement parallel "sub-phase" functions, any of which may call
> > die on failure.
> 
> > Are there any objections to removing this warning from the
> > devmanual?
> 
> PMS doesn't guarantee that die works correctly in a subshell:
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~ulm/pms/5/pms.html#x1-12800011.3.3
> 
> So the devmanual agrees with the spec, and the eclasses need to be
> fixed.

What does it take to change future specifications to guarantee this?
What's holding this from becoming guaranteed? Why not fix the specs?

When we're considering changing this, just a reference isn't enough;
please state why it is "_not_ guaranteed". What is the reasoning?

Thank you in advance.

-- 
With kind regards,

Tom Wijsman (TomWij)
Gentoo Developer

E-mail address  : TomWij@gentoo.org
GPG Public Key  : 6D34E57D
GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2  ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]