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 9A54B13800E for ; Mon, 6 Aug 2012 11:44:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E8161E076B; Mon, 6 Aug 2012 11:44:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-bk0-f53.google.com (mail-bk0-f53.google.com [209.85.214.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70678E0747 for ; Mon, 6 Aug 2012 11:44:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: by bkwj4 with SMTP id j4so1266128bkw.40 for ; Mon, 06 Aug 2012 04:44:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=efT4ALS8KUA6cnovap3Nh5i4KrpFVnbJsx/dJYe7lP8=; b=exlBezaYSyupsOkjrK1SknhD+bb2+1vq43zD8J4ACsbXKTbG11cAGTWjOUXVKssRFQ dKD2PVoKGOZymmMfYICskX9e6iYx7x6lIPuS6Du9zK0UAwtNjzSiC2ncTGhDLWqtTMp5 a+BI+HxsZmXEPRr/mShb1YdiGI2h6ZGrCaS5AUXjTBxXNi1vwoxChyEJn5srQMaw964D K3B7wPLT45hcZHB59KNa6Mj1nQKeNOBDP3dBeuRd3e1Q3FwmYCghKH4pJrBQkTLRiEoH sIs2F3ThjIwqy6fDEJbGTs4g02v7Wab9NatH3MUknFTQo7t2I8tumM8xdNlZDt+XNWqY Yysg== 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 10.204.154.215 with SMTP id p23mr3968449bkw.53.1344253440417; Mon, 06 Aug 2012 04:44:00 -0700 (PDT) Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.205.82.12 with HTTP; Mon, 6 Aug 2012 04:44:00 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20120806122025.27faf285@pomiocik.lan> References: <501F95A8.6070105@gentoo.org> <20120806122025.27faf285@pomiocik.lan> Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2012 07:44:00 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 77iXyXaQdvhyGDsgAUTHe9Dx4nE Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] systemd.eclass: Patch for new function systemd_get_udevdir() From: Rich Freeman To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Cc: ssuominen@gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: c14ab44e-06d3-4226-8b33-3a3245fb6799 X-Archives-Hash: 419e66db59496c2aa47f0628fe6f8649 On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 6:20 AM, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny = wrote: > Most importantly, this allows us to easily find out which packages > install such files and perform global operations on them. For example, > if a particular user had systemd locations in INSTALL_MASK and changed > his mind, he can easily update his system by rebuilding all packages > inheriting systemd.eclass. > > If all packages installing udev rules start inheriting it, the above > will no longer be correct. Also, the opposite way -- rebuilding > packages installing udev rules -- won't be that easy. This seems like a bit of overloading. Right now we really lack a good way to figure out what packages COULD install files in a given place - we can only figure out which ones have installed files in that location on our own systems. If we really want that capability then I think the solution is to design it thoughtfully. Sure, some detective work with eclass inheritance might give us clues, but I wouldn't let it be a big driver behind how we use and design eclasses. That said, there might be other valid reasons for keeping udev and systemd separate eclass-wise... Rich