On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 1:33 PM, Mike Frysinger <vap...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 16 Jan 2018 23:32, Mike Gilbert wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 4:46 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > > Some ebuilds are a bit hard to fix their use of the network in src > > > phases, so allow them to disable things. This allows us to turn off > > > access by default and for the vast majority while we work out how to > > > fix the few broken packages. > > > > If we are going to allow network sandboxing to be disabled in > > individual ebuilds, we should also allow the other sandboxes to be > > disabled for the same reasons. sys-apps/sandbox has been notoriously > > buggy, for example. > > that sandbox can already be disabled dynamically in ebuilds as needed. > i don't really see a reason for it to be a RESTRICT value. > It used to be in RESTRICT even; it was dropped in 2015. https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-pms/message/05f8faf4f1477b4406619b92bb7722b7 I don't mind if portage acts on other tokens (allowed in the spec). I do think we should file a patch to PMS. If they accept it, other PMs can implement this feature in a future EAPI (and in portage, it will just work in all EAPIs) But if we never tell them about the tokens, they can never implement them. -A -mike >
