From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <gentoo-dev+bounces-81938-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org> 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 062701396D0 for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Mon, 21 Aug 2017 01:25:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D6BAA1FC084; Mon, 21 Aug 2017 01:25:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from blaine.gmane.org (unknown [195.159.176.226]) (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 7F0071FC048 for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon, 21 Aug 2017 01:25:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <lnx-gentoo-dev@m.gmane.org>) id 1djbSp-0007Qw-NS for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Mon, 21 Aug 2017 03:25:11 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH v2 01/12] dev-util/shadowman: New package Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2017 01:25:03 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <pan$ce6d1$2abc45ef$d1060647$8f480d06@cox.net> References: <20170817083641.3507-1-mgorny@gentoo.org> <20170820102659.19050-1-mgorny@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org> List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org> List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org> 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 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org User-Agent: Pan/0.143 (Quaint little villages here and there; 720a1c5b3) X-Archives-Salt: e621a2b8-2ec8-43b3-8c92-00fd504449f1 X-Archives-Hash: 5a9cfde3f0b2f7cae6c3507478f3ba69 Michał Górny posted on Sun, 20 Aug 2017 12:26:48 +0200 as excerpted: > --- /dev/null > +++ b/dev-util/shadowman/shadowman-9999.ebuild > @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@ [snip...] > +# note: only for testing > +KEYWORDS="~alpha ~amd64 ~arm ~arm64 ~hppa ~ia64 ~m68k ~mips ~ppc ~ppc64 ~s390 ~sh ~sparc ~x86" OK, I know you said this was only for testing, but a question I had the first time around and didn't ask... It seems to me just as easy... and less chance of potential problems should a tester accidentally commit it, to handle it the way gentoo/kde does with live and not-yet-ready ebuilds in their overlay: Blank keywords in the ebuild and add it to package.accept_keywords (or simply package.keywords if you prefer the old name) with a ** entry if you're testing. Example from my package.accept_keywords (this entry might be in the symlinkable files in the overlay now, but it wasn't when I created it): # 2017.0611 kirigami needed for kde systemsettings # might as well do it live-9999 too =kde-frameworks/kirigami-9999 ** Not that it matters particularly, but is there a reason you chose to put the keywords in the ebuild instead of having people do the ** thing as above? A blank keywords, thereby forcing people who actually want to test to do the ** thing, would seem less of an invitation to problems should someone accidentally commit it during testing (tho admittedly this is a new package so problems are less likely, but I'm just used to seeing it require the ** accept_keyword thing). So I'm just wondering what reason you might have had to do it this way instead. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman