Duncan wrote:
> That's an interesting idea. I don't personally care either way, as long
> as @world continues to /not/ include system/@system, but having world
> (without the @) continue to include system /would/ be useful for backward
> compatibility. I think it'd be much better in terms of ease of educating
> the vast majority of stable users, as the @ is new anyway, so it can have
> new behaviour without a problem, but having new behaviour for world does
> present a significant re-education/retraining issue.
The only drawback I see is that we would then have the following:
@system == system
...but...
@world != world
This, I would think, could cause confusion too - and we'd have to live
with and document this "quirk".
How about issuing a warning when portage starts if the user specifies
"world" (with no "@" sign) as the only specified target *and* @system is
not in world_sets?
It would warn that the world set no longer automatically includes system
(i.e., @system) and also that it is better, from now on, to explicitly
use the "@" sign for all sets like world and system (since these two are
special cases grandfathered in).
-Joe
