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 70D3D1381F3 for ; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 19:23:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A2101E0BB0; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 19:23:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from a1www.kph.uni-mainz.de (a1iwww1.kph.uni-mainz.de [134.93.134.1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 83004E0BA7 for ; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 19:23:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de (a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de [134.93.134.92]) by a1www.kph.uni-mainz.de (8.14.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id r3QJNiWQ024569 for ; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 21:23:44 +0200 Received: from a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de (8.14.6/8.14.2) with ESMTP id r3QJNgLt005587; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 21:23:42 +0200 Received: (from ulm@localhost) by a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de (8.14.6/8.14.6/Submit) id r3QJNgBF005584; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 21:23:42 +0200 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: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <20858.54334.173774.722711@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 21:23:42 +0200 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Should mirror restriction imply bindist restriction? In-Reply-To: <201304261452.09923.vapier@gentoo.org> References: <20858.42422.774640.252393@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <201304261452.09923.vapier@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: VM 8.2.0b under 24.3.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) From: Ulrich Mueller X-Archives-Salt: 0a2f0e27-a14e-4c75-93c4-19798b089efe X-Archives-Hash: 644c57006218a0571409b849cfb3486a >>>>> On Fri, 26 Apr 2013, Mike Frysinger wrote: >> Currently RESTRICT=mirror and RESTRICT=bindist are independent of >> each other. I wonder if the former should imply the latter. >> >> Is there any package where the files in SRC_URI cannot be mirrored >> (i.e., redistributed), but where the built package can be >> distributed? > i've used RESTRICT=mirror in the past when the files were really > large (like games or toolchain source tarballs) and upstream already > had a good mirroring system. in both cases, there was no binary > redistribution restrictions. > so my answer would be no: we have two independent knobs and let's > keep them that way. Right. And as was pointed to me on IRC, another legitimate case for mirror restriction are packages in overlays whose distfiles are not on mirrors. Then it obviously makes no sense to check mirrors for it. Ulrich