On Thu, 08 Jun 2006 06:49:39 -0400 Alec Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On Wednesday 07 June 2006 19:12, Alec Warner wrote: > > > >>I would be more concerned with convincing the rest of the > >>developers. adding crap in base profile.bashrc will affect 99% of > >>users, so it better be friggin correct and useful, otherwise you > >>will piss a ton of people off. > > > > > > versus the people who are really annoyed that such support hasnt > > yet been integrated into portage proper ? > > > > yes, from the portage side of things, it may be a pita to implement > > per-package env ... but from the user side of things, it's a huge > > help -mike > > My e-mail was basically worded as to say "Solar paste your crap to > this ML." Is there any reason you need package.env in portage proper > as opposed to bashrc? I remember portage people asserting before that package.env tricks from bashrc don't work completely, in that it needs to be in place for portage.py before the bashrc script is sourced. Is this no longer a problem? -- Kevin F. Quinn
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
