-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Petteri Räty wrote: > Zac Medico kirjoitti: >> What do people think about these two approaches? Personally, I >> would prefer approach #2 for the sake of simplicity and >> maintainability. The sooner that we start storing eclasses.tbz2 for >> each installed package, the sooner that we will be able to have more >> freedom with the eclasses in the live portage tree. > > One thing that comes to mind is that how do we handle the case where the > old version of the eclass has a major bug in pkg_postrm for example.
I suppose we could check the live tree for the required eclasses and use them if they are all available. Perhaps, in that case, we should use the live ebuild too if it is available. In cases where something isn't available in the live tree we could fall back to the saved files as a last resort. We'd have to maintain api compatibility, but at least there would still be a reasonable chance for the user to do a normal uninstall after some eclasses have been removed. Zac -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFFTIK3/ejvha5XGaMRAiRTAKCV31alUOZjVaC5qh3iWNBlEuW/wwCdFxiz TgJ4hqxMap9thhy1VIEQrOk= =o5pR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- [email protected] mailing list
