On Sun, 26 Jan 2014 12:43:37 -0800 Alec Warner <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't buy that. The behavior appears to be currently undefined. > Changing it to different undefined behavior is allowed.
The point of undefined behaviour is that anything that is relying upon undefined behaviour doing a particular thing is broken. PMS doesn't define what happens to XDG_*, so if your ebuilds need a particular thing done for it then they must be fixed. Perhaps PMS should be more explicit in stating this -- we lifted the concept of undefined behaviour from the C and C++ standards, and just assumed that people would know what it meant. Maybe we need a bit more text to clear up the misconception we see every now and again that "undefined" somehow means "it's ok to assume what some version of Portage happens to do, since the specification doesn't say you can't do that"... -- Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
