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 1E7Li8-0006xL-JY for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 22 Aug 2005 23:28:13 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j7MNQqa6030187; Mon, 22 Aug 2005 23:26:52 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j7MNQqCY023420 for ; Mon, 22 Aug 2005 23:26:52 GMT Received: from zg040066.ppp.dion.ne.jp ([222.2.40.66] helo=opteron246.suzuki-stubbs.home) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.43) id 1E7Lha-0007pN-6L for gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Mon, 22 Aug 2005 23:27:38 +0000 Received: by opteron246.suzuki-stubbs.home (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 02093102DE9; Tue, 23 Aug 2005 08:28:10 +0900 (JST) From: Jason Stubbs To: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Environment Whitelisting Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 08:28:08 +0900 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.90 References: <4308E349.8010107@egr.msu.edu> <20050822233323.276ad887@andy.genone.homeip.net> <20050822214059.GU10816@nightcrawler> In-Reply-To: <20050822214059.GU10816@nightcrawler> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1162098.z2OTJrgKAA"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200508230828.10810.jstubbs@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 593b012e-fca8-4d36-b719-4a248aecec34 X-Archives-Hash: 6d3bcacae7e5fe5bdb31b180159f3c8f --nextPart1162098.z2OTJrgKAA Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Tuesday 23 August 2005 06:40, Brian Harring wrote: > On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 11:33:23PM +0200, Marius Mauch wrote: > > Theoretical discussions about this are pointless IMO without > > numbers/facts to back things up. > > I'd posit theroetical discussions about this are pointless without > getting ebuild dev's to give a yay/nay on whether they want it or not; > not much for trying to force it down their throats if they don't want > it (more work, essentially). I don't really see what it has to do with ebuild devs... We're talking abou= t=20 the user's environment leaking into the portage build environment, no?=20 Environment vars used by ebuilds can/should be set by users in a portage=20 configuration file rather than being added to the environment. The only=20 issue i see here is user customizations - fex, a hypothetical colorgcc that= =20 gets its config info from the env. =2D-=20 Jason Stubbs --nextPart1162098.z2OTJrgKAA Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBDCl+KxvWNPsk/ZP4RAsZwAJ49NT/CEjdJbQ6Cunev+zLEHgp0cACfTTLv mi/6gFzWqb5gApKyWePyj3g= =g3p2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1162098.z2OTJrgKAA-- -- gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list