[gentoo-dev] Re: Why arch-specific make.conf files?

[Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net>]

Marius Mauch posted <20051116160434.629519df@sven.genone.homeip.net>,
excerpted below,  on Wed, 16 Nov 2005 16:04:34 +0100:

> You have a list of (some of) these things? From a portage POV those
> things are broken, the only thing you can safely assume about
> make.conf is that it exists (and even that is debatable).

Plus, I'm enthusiastically using the still fairly new "source xyzfile"
functionality in portage to break out my portage config into various
modules (use, fs, net, etc).  My make.conf itself is simply a collection
of several "source" lines.  If whatever is brokenly assuming it can
collect such info from make.conf is sourcing the file using bash, or if it
too understands the source directive, no problem, but if not, it could be
a serious problem!

FWIW, I've experienced no issues here. (I don't use distcc, so that
already mentioned issue doesn't affect me.)

-- 
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 in
http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/22/rms_interview.html


-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list