On Saturday 30 April 2005 02:44, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 09:36:54AM +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: > > What about the unused `ebuild [ebuild] config`? Isn't that the perfect > > place for this sort of stuff? The only package that I know that uses this > > feature is mysql. There are way more possibilities. > > No, ebuild config shouldn't be abused like this. Say I have an existing > install of mysql, and the package maintainer puts in an updated > logrotate.d file. Running 'ebuild mysql.ebuild config' is meant for NEW > installations only, and it doesn't enable me to take advantage of > CONFIG_PROTECT. I've seen a package where running the config phase when > the package is already set up blows away your existing config. It gives > you a warning first, but how would I then get an updated logrotate.d > file?
I can't see how you can call it abuse. There's no requirement that the config phase be non-interactive. On the contrary, it *should* be interactive so that the user is notified about and has control over what can be done. > I see only two viable options. > - Unconditional, use INSTALL_MASK, no RDEPEND on logrotate > - Conditional on USE=logrotate > > The first one is what is generally used in the tree so far. I don't really mind what's done. I'm just suggesting that config can be used for a lot more than what it is at the moment, including being a third option in the above list. My preferred option would be INSTALL_MASK. Regards, Jason Stubbs
pgpKLbliEB7Jg.pgp
Description: PGP signature
