On Thu, 1 Feb 2007 16:18:22 -0500 Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | On Thursday 01 February 2007, Alec Warner wrote: | > Because then you get fun things like package.provided where people | > inject a randomly configured package that fails PM tests (aka | > built_with_use). You'd have to have some sort of tautology that | > says provided packages (and crazyconfig packages) always pass any | > checks (such as built_with_use, but could be other checks as well) | > and then just fail during build if they don't. | | leave it as an exercise for the user to make sure they set | package.use to match their .config
I'm all for letting users do stupid things if they really want, but isn't this like sticking up a deliberately wonky staircase with no handrails over an open vat of evil super villain acid with a sign saying "free cookies" at the top? -- Ciaran McCreesh Mail : ciaranm at ciaranm.org Web : http://ciaranm.org/ Paludis, the secure package manager : http://paludis.pioto.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
