From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DD6F1381F3 for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2013 16:26:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6E821E09A2; Sat, 15 Jun 2013 16:26:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jacques.telenet-ops.be (jacques.telenet-ops.be [195.130.132.50]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F6D1E096C for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2013 16:26:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from TOMWIJ-GENTOO ([94.226.55.127]) by jacques.telenet-ops.be with bizsmtp id ogSm1l0022khLEN0JgSmNA; Sat, 15 Jun 2013 18:26:46 +0200 Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2013 18:24:13 +0200 From: Tom Wijsman To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Calling die in a subshell Message-ID: <20130615182413.2e1b2f8a@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> In-Reply-To: <20924.37728.751450.362549@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> References: <51BC9105.5070604@gentoo.org> <20924.37728.751450.362549@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.0 (GTK+ 2.24.18; x86_64-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_/tTBju22Nnxvl_KcTdHZL.lU"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: d4ba7b7c-b4ce-4a03-9fa0-39afdcd1f572 X-Archives-Hash: 8b13428425340faa5b38bd2fb596c142 --Sig_/tTBju22Nnxvl_KcTdHZL.lU Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 18:16:32 +0200 Ulrich Mueller wrote: > >>>>> On Sat, 15 Jun 2013, Mike Gilbert wrote: >=20 > > The devmanual warns that calling die in a subshell does not work. >=20 > > http://devmanual.gentoo.org/ebuild-writing/error-handling/index.html >=20 > > This warning has been obsolete for some time; modern versions of > > Portage handle die in a subshell just fine. >=20 > > 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. >=20 > > Are there any objections to removing this warning from the > > devmanual? >=20 > PMS doesn't guarantee that die works correctly in a subshell: > http://dev.gentoo.org/~ulm/pms/5/pms.html#x1-12800011.3.3 >=20 > 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. --=20 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 --Sig_/tTBju22Nnxvl_KcTdHZL.lU Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJRvJUtAAoJEJWyH81tNOV9/1sIAIcydYJJTHCOfcGFwUu86dht LIMAe2B0OWn9w+4WLCBfhvAgMSy/pPUwJ6PHS8aZlrM00AwT9YK2e76fJBE4oB8t 8YYpw6OP0551kz5Y92KXhdeionIlv64ayJAQej6LX96L4+yPM60mlTFYodt+cRxX GnbS+FnHOMu6U/FxKaolOfrTKcHPtq0PE0ZSjfwjetofdIkznnhyRHKMTSwnynq7 cQuuKf6yFdtUiXt6u3ZOEBrJNS2EEu+GRfz1RrsPDc7u0TIpXfHNTirzG/QtVDuH wUgRi6EAaswZq+cl2cwTOy9rVlt7BiFsJAjLr5bJoQHH0brs07SzLycAPheveOQ= =/zHe -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/tTBju22Nnxvl_KcTdHZL.lU--