On Sat, 14 Dec 2013 15:57:04 -0600 William Hubbs <willi...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 08:47:01PM +0000, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto > wrote: > > OK, I see what you mean. > > To be clear, I'm not ready to have a stage3 without netifrc. If / > > when we update catalyst so that the new stage3 is the sum of > > @system and additional packages, we can move netifrc to that list. > > Actually I'm not even sure how necessary that kind of update is. > > I didn't quite follow what the reasoning against my second proposal > was. > > Once openrc-0.12.4 is stable everywhere it is going to go stable, I > want to add virtual/network-manager to the tree. This would contain a > list of network manager providers. > > I think adding it to the tree is good, because we have other virtuals > for multiple packages that perform the same function -- > virtual/logger, virtual/mta, etc. > > Once that is done, we could easily add it to @system then I would drop > the netifrc use flag. That would take care of the situation if netifrc > was the default provider. > > Then, if you decide to add the function you are talking about to > catalyst, we could look into dropping virtual/network-manager from > @system. > > I'll attach the ebuild below so everyone sees it. > > William > IMHO this virtual shouldn't be added. It would be a pure meta package for the user. That case is not directly comparable with virtual/mta: We've got this for other packages to depend on it, at least that is my understanding. In a case like this, a handbook entry should suffice. Luis Ressel
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
