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 EC89E13829C for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2016 08:02:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2302D142A0; Wed, 8 Jun 2016 08:01:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1B1B825402C for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2016 08:01:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.204.75.6] (public-gprs392570.centertel.pl [37.47.164.187]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mgorny) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B92953408EC; Wed, 8 Jun 2016 08:01:50 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android In-Reply-To: <22359.50802.120064.86645@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> References: <20160520160117.3c400970.mgorny@gentoo.org> <22359.44157.475779.594768@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20160608083730.411f8140.mgorny@gentoo.org> <22359.50802.120064.86645@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> 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-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] New GLEP: file installation masks From: =?UTF-8?Q?Micha=C5=82_G=C3=B3rny?= Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2016 10:01:43 +0200 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org,Ulrich Mueller Message-ID: X-Archives-Salt: 16ff18c9-524a-463c-911b-417ba01f648d X-Archives-Hash: 316287a2e60ca060e9559b5845aeef20 Dnia 8 czerwca 2016 09:17:06 CEST, Ulrich Mueller napisał(a): >>>>>> On Wed, 8 Jun 2016, Michał Górny wrote: > >> On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 07:26:21 +0200 >> Ulrich Mueller wrote: > >>> Therefore I think that repository metadata is the wrong place for >>> storing the install-mask.conf file. It is configuration, specific to >>> Portage (but not to the repository), so /usr/share/portage/config/ >>> would be a better location to store it. > >> ...which would mean we have to re-release Portage every time it >> changes, which in turn means we can't do anything without having >> shout at users to upgrade Portage, and upgrade, and upgrade... > >> systemd uses new path? Upgrade Portage. We support a new >> localization? Upgrade Portage. We failed horribly and your system >> no longer boots? Upgrade Portage. > >Even now not all files in /usr/share/portage/config/ are owned by >sys-apps/portage. So if you expect path groups to change such >frequently, create a subdirectory install-mask/ (similar to sets/) >there and have packages install their configuration files in it. > >Alternatively, one could think about placing the path groups file in >profiles/ which would still be better than repository metadata which >looks totally wrong to me. I though the goal was to rid profiles/ of files other than profiles. I can change the GLEP to have paths apply with masters logic if you want. That shouldn't cause much trouble, considering that the mask is evaluated per package anyway. > >Another question, how are path groups supposed to work in Prefix? >The GLEP doesn't address this. Hmm... I would say the obvious solution is to apply the paths relatively to EPREFIX, wouldn't it? > >Ulrich -- Best regards, Michał Górny (by phone)