Kevin F. Quinn napsal(a): > On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 23:23:55 +0000 > Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> If a RESTRICT value is questionable, it shouldn't be supported or >> used. >> > > I agree; it'd be useful to know exactly what is failing the sandbox and > why, with the aim of fixing sandbox if it isn't quite up to the job.
+1; RESTRICT=sandbox shouldn't exist.
If you want to write an ebuild for some commercial broken stuff that
doesn't work w/ sandbox and stick it into some overlay, then stick
if has sandbox ${FEATURES} ; then
eerror "This thing is FUBAR with sandbox"
die "If you really want to install it, disable sandbox manually"
fi
into pkg_setup and be done with it; no need for RESTRICT=sandbox or
ACCEPT_RESTRICT. Users can decide whether they really wish to install
such app and disable sandbox temporarily if they think it's a good idea.
If you'd like to commit this to the official tree, then either fix it
properly or don't commit such stuff at all.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
... still no signature ;)
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
