Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: Environment Whitelisting

[Kristian Benoit <kbenoit@opersys.com>]

On Sun, 2005-08-21 at 21:41 -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
> Yeah, I agree that a build that is fragile with regard to environment
> variables could be an upstream issue.  The advantage of
> white/black/override list portage feature is that it would provide a
> way to work around these kinds of problems (until they are fixed
> upstream).

Another point of view could be that leaving the environment as is would
help providing bugs to the upstream. But I must agree with you that
having it optional would probably be the best thing.

I think the fourth solution would be nice if we have
a /etc/portage/package.env so that if one need to specify an non portage
environment variable, it could be specified on a per packge basis. It
could also be a /etc/portage/package.env.d that contain a per-package
script that set-up the environment for that package.

The script coud be called with the calling environment set a variable
name "keep_variables" to a list of the variables that should be kept for
that particuliar package.

The calling environment could also specify a keep_variables varible so
that we keep those variable in build environment.

Kristian

-- 
gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list