Re: [gentoo-pms] Clarifications on dosym behaviour

[Ralph Sennhauser <sera@gentoo.org>]

On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 20:23:10 +0100
Ulrich Mueller <ulm@gentoo.org> wrote:

> >>>>> On Fri, 27 Jan 2012, Ralph Sennhauser wrote:
> 
> > Just recently Portage started to emit "* QA Notice: dosym target
> > omits basename ..." for "dosym /path_to_file/file /some_other_path/"
> 
> > The PMS says:
> 
> > dosym: Creates a symbolic link named as for its second parameter,
> > pointing to the first. If the directory containing the new link does
> > not exist, creates it. Failure behaviour is EAPI dependent as per
> > section 12.3.3.1.
> 
> > The part "Creates a symbolic link named as for its second parameter"
> > could qualify it for requiring a basename.
> 
> Exactly.
> 
> > As the behaviour of an implicit basename of the second parameter was
> > used for a long time I wonder if the PMS needs to be updated and
> > clarify the dosym behaviour or if this new QA warning can be seen as
> > a long overdue implementation of the intended behaviour.
> 
> This has been discussed in bug 379899 and the conclusion was that PMS
> specifies the intended behaviour.
> 
> At the moment a directory argument produces only a QA warning in
> Portage. I think the long-term plan is to turn it into an error
> though.
> 

Thanks for the clarifications.

Cheers