On Sunday 10 September 2006 21:44, Zac Medico wrote:
For example, we can have a list of variable names
stored in a new variable called COLON_SEPARATED that will reside
in either the profiles or /etc/env.d/ itself.
/etc/env.d makes most sense ... we just have to worry about how to handle the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Sunday 10 September 2006 21:44, Zac Medico wrote:
For example, we can have a list of variable names
stored in a new variable called COLON_SEPARATED that will reside
in either the profiles or /etc/env.d/ itself.
Zac Medico wrote:
What is the best way to propagate information about these two
variable types? For example, we can have a list of variable names
stored in a new variable called COLON_SEPARATED that will reside
in either the profiles or /etc/env.d/ itself. Variable names not
listed in
Am Montag, 11. September 2006 03:44 schrieb Zac Medico:
Hi everyone,
Portage currently has two hard-coded lists of variables that control
the behavior of env-update.
The same applies to eselect env.
I'd like to make these variables
configurable so that package maintainers have direct
Zac Medico wrote:
We can store them in /etc/env.d/ itself. The env-update tool could
be hare coded to consider COLON_SEPARATED and SPACE_SEPARATED as
being implicitly within the SPACE_SEPARATED class. The tool would
make one pass to accumulate those two variables, and then another
pass to
On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 18:44:23 -0700 Zac Medico [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| Portage currently has two hard-coded lists of variables that control
| the behavior of env-update.
I realise GLEP 24 is considered not going very far, but in the
interests of what *has* been done on it... Is it worth
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
Zac Medico wrote:
We can store them in /etc/env.d/ itself. The env-update tool could
be hare coded to consider COLON_SEPARATED and SPACE_SEPARATED as
being implicitly within the SPACE_SEPARATED class. The tool would
make
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 18:44:23 -0700 Zac Medico [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| Portage currently has two hard-coded lists of variables that control
| the behavior of env-update.
I realise GLEP 24 is considered not going very
On Monday 11 September 2006 03:44, Zac Medico wrote:
Hi everyone,
Portage currently has two hard-coded lists of variables that control
the behavior of env-update. I'd like to make these variables
configurable so that package maintainers have direct control over
them. The variables break
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Paul de Vrieze wrote:
On Monday 11 September 2006 03:44, Zac Medico wrote:
What is the best way to propagate information about these two
variable types? For example, we can have a list of variable names
stored in a new variable called
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi everyone,
Portage currently has two hard-coded lists of variables that control
the behavior of env-update. I'd like to make these variables
configurable so that package maintainers have direct control over
them. The variables break down into two
Zac Medico [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Portage currently has two hard-coded lists of variables that control
the behavior of env-update. I'd like to make these variables
configurable so that package maintainers have direct control over
them. The variables break down into two basic types: colon
12 matches
Mail list logo
