From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org)
	by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1E7bcS-0006oR-1A
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 23 Aug 2005 16:27:24 +0000
Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j7NGPPf0024007;
	Tue, 23 Aug 2005 16:25:25 GMT
Received: from www.opersys.com (opersys.com [64.40.108.71])
	by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j7NGPOqb016018
	for <gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Tue, 23 Aug 2005 16:25:24 GMT
Received: from [10.10.10.4] (dsl-136-78.aei.ca [66.36.136.78])
	by www.opersys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA16563
	for <gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Tue, 23 Aug 2005 10:00:59 -0700
Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Environment Whitelisting
From: Kristian Benoit <kbenoit@opersys.com>
To: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org
In-Reply-To: <430A9AAB.2000709@egr.msu.edu>
References: <4308E349.8010107@egr.msu.edu>
	 <20050822233323.276ad887@andy.genone.homeip.net>
	 <20050822214059.GU10816@nightcrawler>
	 <200508230828.10810.jstubbs@gentoo.org>
	 <1124765166.6502.132.camel@localhost>  <430A9AAB.2000709@egr.msu.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 12:19:55 -0400
Message-Id: <1124813995.6502.147.camel@localhost>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-portage-dev+help@gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-portage-dev+unsubscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-portage-dev+subscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-portage-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.1.1 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Archives-Salt: 697503bd-2517-449f-b966-4df4b9307eeb
X-Archives-Hash: c96a5547a73575fc7edafe469f6d8de4

On Mon, 2005-08-22 at 23:40 -0400, Alec Warner wrote:
> Why wouldn't you want him blocking out a variable that is KNOWN to
> break a build?

I could be trying to fix that up. It might usually break, but one could
have a special setting like uclibc. The breakage might come from an
external lib that one hacked and it doesnt break cause of his hack.

You probably can find a lot of other situations.

But as you said:

> you can always remove it via some setting ( /etc/portage or
> otherwise ).

Black/whitelisting could allow you to specify vars to go through.

Kristian

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