On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 03:19:17 +0100 Marius Mauch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So therefore I'd be interested if there are any strong reasons > to keep this approach or if we could switch to one variable > RSYNC_OPTIONS that's predefined in make.globals and users could > redefine it in make.conf (of course transition might be problematic, > but let's ignore that for now). I agree more options are needed, but i think a minimal set of defaults that user can't change is a good thing (there is no point to change most of options that are currently default in fact). Also, options like verbosity and progress meter make more sense when controlled on command line using -v/-q and --nospinner from emerge than in a configuration file. So imho, RSYNC_OPTIONS should more be called RSYNC_EXTRA_OPTIONS, with default well documented so that we know what are options really left to customization. Another approach would be to have an /etc/portage/rsync.conf with detailed option like the ones currently in make.conf, but more numerous. This would ensure that only non-default options are modified by user, and would solve the transition problem (because new config files are always merged whereas make.conf updates are often ignored). Or does this sound too "make.conf.d-ish"? -- TGL. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
