Alright then, I will give bash4.4 a try and if there are any problems, I'll file a proper bug report.
Best regards, Andy On 30 September 2016 at 15:38, William Hubbs <willi...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 11:29:05AM +1300, Kent Fredric wrote: > > On Thu, 29 Sep 2016 23:56:34 +0200 > > Andy Mender <andymenderu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > I believe the main problem comes from /bin/bash and potential symlinks > that > > > would need to be introduced as part of the slotting. > > > > In a pinch you could probably get away with > > calling :1 /usr/bin/bash-4.4 instead of /usr/bin/bash, and then > > offering no luxuries beyond that, leaving it up to the user to do the > rest. > > > > Then you could test it in ~/ with PATH + Symlink in ~/bin/ ... maybe. > > > > There would just not be much point, because the real purpose of testing > > 4.4 is not for fear of it breaking user experience ( which is a > > problem, but not the primary motive ), but for making everything else > > that runs with bash runs OK. > > > > Maybe you could do some horrible QA Violation like USE=multislot > > which changes the slot from :0 and adds the -suffix at the same time. > > > > But I still don't think its a useful or good idea. > > I am against it as well. The purpose of this testing is to eventually > move to bash-4.4 being stable and replacing bash-4.3, so slotting it > would make that more complex later. > > William > >
