From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47A491396D0 for ; Fri, 22 Sep 2017 21:51:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 817732043F1; Fri, 22 Sep 2017 21:51:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-yw0-x235.google.com (mail-yw0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2BCF2E0BE5 for ; Fri, 22 Sep 2017 21:51:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-yw0-x235.google.com with SMTP id i6so1622451ywc.9 for ; Fri, 22 Sep 2017 14:51:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=8Ve4kUmwerFOokmhXl8eU7EIlO3fnnr5R8VatV9nk2M=; b=j4Beyev3SdNrwxmLW1/Sd4eJ9TPVtzIGjd/i4jQtAQ1SmsB4iJxAMJMxa0f+SG/NDp qGzkhsJ0XRUtS1rQfo0G3DX1gSDpwevsv+o40m3M4UKAoJw+TqVh2ctuyXZ5Di/tEYhi T4IO1iBqztR+i1l5ckB8bjw+eYkAc/Di8HGENQ+t6oyyfj5WdjdUFJWnn6QRMYCpp9L3 Qhm9WlWdePAIQuG9DM6I8efoeIEXp1A3bGjxPOfkNBKriEJtptdJK+Au1Ew0NoNmj1uC kvpgu6u05kk9AN4FDaJbIWw6dZJI+AayC/3e3LBag4k4RDIkZ1w+rG041+2n+QIrgecM pEvw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=8Ve4kUmwerFOokmhXl8eU7EIlO3fnnr5R8VatV9nk2M=; b=HWRJjZIpgmoEFeZuKwKlWlrBNreiPv1yQG9NOLXImJqkMUC9/hqT6Sf1W0zijFsybO Ro2cbiONuMPjfeAU9Bxz15YE9INtZ6y+7aeqo/Dv2QGHN9Vr10piyvtI2ZGw055s6fs+ tCIiQY62La0JvlPAEFpbMdqKa4noslFdXvEZDoCyRPO9nnDjhjB/5hIZhKtKVxWBdUUy jiunfhza70UBpO9sQ9nSAXM9zD5NOw48lDysmudBll0pDNpcZp99+yMWfq2OViDBy06o +9mV42zzxsAETr6ivCqa3J/CZU+075N+B1OE63caH9kF9I6pyIWSwvxITkgAset/mcO2 zesg== X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUhcZ1UsnLIgamqnjC1BL6YiHes6I3uP9Gp1+aF/YH2mMOdTq66b s5IRqg3hC2fVRDVpgdEDl0URJYRL5Q+iYSpbj/8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QAcJce06oEah1uFvmzxWhkOFQNskSjPepUVudab7F7xUjwJdChaqJ/lTFRF8mVUV7NCIc45lr5mhwme/5OzDIE= X-Received: by 10.129.167.67 with SMTP id e64mr343999ywh.85.1506117081702; Fri, 22 Sep 2017 14:51:21 -0700 (PDT) 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 Received: by 10.129.131.138 with HTTP; Fri, 22 Sep 2017 14:51:21 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1506023769.15165.14.camel@gentoo.org> References: <1506023769.15165.14.camel@gentoo.org> From: R0b0t1 Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2017 16:51:21 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Reviving the Sandbox project To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 74db8a59-0b2f-448d-b53d-0b7d5cb2d44c X-Archives-Hash: c43bed691611ae5a6885332943ad0187 On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 2:56 PM, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny = wrote: > [1]:https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Sandbox > I think I understand, in principle, why a sandbox could be useful, but would it not be more productive to follow up with projects which do unexpected things to ask that they not do those things? In the sense that Portage can in its entirely be isolated in various ways (user groups, containers, virtual machines, etc) I am not sure adding another layer is the most expedient option, especially if it is hard to maintain. I once saw Java developers talking about introducing changes to an enterprise program by not modifying the source, but keeping the source as is, and then maintaining a set of reflection-based patches that would modify the program after it was loaded but before it was run. This did not make sense to me, and it seems a lot like what is being done with the sandbox. In some cases that can make sense, I suppose. I am not a very smart man, so I would not know the necessary burden of proof. Respectfully, R0b0t1