From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1HwQpe-0006Ya-5r for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 07 Jun 2007 22:51:54 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l57Mogoa018291; Thu, 7 Jun 2007 22:50:42 GMT Received: from imf25aec.mail.bellsouth.net (imf25aec.mail.bellsouth.net [205.152.59.73]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l57Mmjv7015986 for ; Thu, 7 Jun 2007 22:48:45 GMT Received: from ibm69aec.bellsouth.net ([74.230.152.83]) by imf25aec.mail.bellsouth.net with ESMTP id <20070607224844.LLXH18208.imf25aec.mail.bellsouth.net@ibm69aec.bellsouth.net> for ; Thu, 7 Jun 2007 18:48:44 -0400 Received: from [192.168.2.54] (really [74.230.152.83]) by ibm69aec.bellsouth.net with ESMTP id <20070607224844.LRON22414.ibm69aec.bellsouth.net@[192.168.2.54]> for ; Thu, 7 Jun 2007 18:48:44 -0400 Message-ID: <46688B4B.4080804@gentoo.org> Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2007 18:48:43 -0400 From: Doug Goldstein User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070326) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [PMS] Version Naming Clarification References: <46680E94.2080705@gentoo.org> <46683328.6010708@gentoo.org> <20070607194245.9b469b5d.genone@gentoo.org> <20070607213207.190d4117@maya> <20070607203321.GA16428@boostbox.mill1.nb.home.nl> <20070607214043.73625566@snowflake> <20070607205238.GA17251@boostbox.mill1.nb.home.nl> <20070607221558.00c67301@snowflake> <20070607213138.GA25337@boostbox.mill1.nb.home.nl> <20070607223849.369de36d@snowflake> <20070607231841.6943fe53@maya> In-Reply-To: <20070607231841.6943fe53@maya> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: ec76e84d-4b95-439b-a0ae-b4f9eb3d9549 X-Archives-Hash: bd93ac474ac3f48a5046512d48430708 Stephen Bennett wrote: > On Thu, 7 Jun 2007 22:38:49 +0100 > Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > >> If Portage currently happens to, say, disable sandbox if an ebuild >> sets GIVE_ME_A_COOKIE="yes" globally, it does not mean that ebuilds >> may rely upon this behaviour, nor does it mean that Portage cannot >> change in such a way that breaks this behaviour. The acceptance >> question is relevant only for legitimate behaviour; things accepted >> by fluke aren't considered accepted. > > However, the fact that Portage currently accepts it is tangentially > related to the matter at hand, because it's a piece of code that may > get confused by this sort of ambiguity. Fortunately it's (relatively > speaking) trivial to fix, because the ambiguity only happens due to > behaviour that shouldn't really be there. Can you and Ciaran update the PMS to be specific and clear on this point? Cause I think everyone is in agreement here and all technical issues have been addressed. Unless I missed something. -- Doug Goldstein http://dev.gentoo.org/~cardoe/ -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list