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 394F71381F3 for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2013 13:57:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CED58E09D2; Sat, 15 Jun 2013 13:57:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E2B36E09C1 for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2013 13:57:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F57533E406 for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2013 13:57:39 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at gentoo.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.732 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.732 tagged_above=-999 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.411, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.319, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([IPv6:::ffff:127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [IPv6:::ffff:127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UIUbWcMVwM9I for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2013 13:57:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6BFED33E4C7 for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2013 13:57:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Unqyt-0000Vr-VU for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Sat, 15 Jun 2013 15:57:27 +0200 Received: from ppp118-209-15-147.lns20.mel4.internode.on.net ([118.209.15.147]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2013 15:57:27 +0200 Received: from kensington by ppp118-209-15-147.lns20.mel4.internode.on.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2013 15:57:27 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Michael Palimaka Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2013 23:57:13 +1000 Message-ID: References: <51BC2C55.7010506@mva.name> <20924.28003.927022.484836@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <51BC6E0A.8070800@flameeyes.eu> <20924.28812.579338.46479@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-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp118-209-15-147.lns20.mel4.internode.on.net User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.2; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 In-Reply-To: <20924.28812.579338.46479@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> X-Archives-Salt: 2f5b5a13-62d2-4902-a53e-f408f8a9a369 X-Archives-Hash: 5b9ac787a3958a6b45818311d60a59bb On 15/06/2013 23:47, Ulrich Mueller wrote: >>>>>> On Sat, 15 Jun 2013, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: > >>> "restrict+http:" (as suggested by the OP) is probably not enough >>> because it doesn't distinguish between fetch and mirror >>> restriction. > >> nofetch+http and nomirror+http ? > > Or the other way around: {fetch,mirror}+http. I'd rather have RESTRICT > apply to all of SRC_URI (as it is now) and use the new syntax to > specify any exceptions from the restriction. > > Ulrich > > I like this idea. Best regards, Michael