Re: [gentoo-dev] per-package environment variables.

[Anton Starikov <antst@ifm.liu.se>]

I didn't get it :)
I'm one person, Anton Starikov and Antst :) antst - just my mailbox :))

So, /etc/portage/packages.env/ seems to be good. That sound cleaner, 
right. But, can you imaging, I'm going to edit 10 files next time, when 
to ICC, for example, will be added some nice optimization flag which I'm 
going to use.
So, the basic point is that they are really "per-package" sollution. If 
we want to keep it. I guess it can be extended, to have directories like 
/etc/portage/packages.env/bash/
Where you can put multiple files similar to /etc/env.d/
So, you can make one env file, and make just symbolic links to it for 
different packages.
So, idea to include some kind of sollution which not strictly 
"per-package". So, you can define something, and easy include/exclude it 
for different packages.


Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Tuesday 31 August 2004 06:26 pm, Antst GD wrote:
> 
>>For the moment both solutions looks ugly for me. At least I can't
>>imaging simple and easy-to-understand syntax for package.env, which will
>>look nice and will parce without problems.
>>
>>What do you think about?
> 
> 
> most of what you proposed seems excessive and confusing (and like you say, 
> ugly) ... a cleaner/simpler solution can be taken from your work though i 
> think ...
> 
> we have a directory:
> /etc/profile/packages.env/
> 
> in this directory we have simple bash (bash because we can just source it and 
> be done with it) files which line up in a similar fashion to the portage 
> tree ... for example, if i want an env file for bash, i would have:
> /etc/profile/packages.env/app-shells/bash
> 
> i think this is about all we need ... and like Antst pointed out, this looks 
> like it'd be real simple to implement ...
> -mike


-- 
Anton Starikov

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list