On Tue, 2 Aug 2011 17:29:29 -0700 Brian Harring <ferri...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 02, 2011 at 06:39:18PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > On Tue, 02 Aug 2011 13:36:12 -0400 > > Jonathan Callen <a...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > That statement needs one more qualification: "and doesn't use > > > portage". Portage will (by default) remove files on uninstall > > > even if they *do not* match the checksum recorded in the vdb. > > > This implies that most people will *not* see any issues due to > > > something other than the package manager modifying the files > > > behind the package manager's back. > > > > Ugh, seriously? When did that happen? That's a massive change to how > > VDB is supposed to work. > > That's been in place a long while; pkgcore has done it from day one > also. > > That's not a "massive change" to vdb behaviour either; file > collisions aren't supposed to occur, as such ownership of the file is > basically guranteed back to a single package. Throw in > CONFIG_PROTECT for adjusting the behaviour, and you have a far more > preferable norm than "lets just leave a shit ton of .pyc/.pyo on the > fs".
It is a massive change, since if the feature is there then people don't feel bad about writing lousy pkg_ functions that leave a load of .pyc / .pyo files all over the place. -- Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
