Drake Wyrm wrote:
I much prefer option 1. It's more work for the maintainers, but breakage from the environment should be fixed in the Makefile and pushed upstream.
Yeah, I agree that a build that is fragile with regard to environment variables could be an upstream issue. The advantage of white/black/override list portage feature is that it would provide a way to work around these kinds of problems (until they are fixed upstream). In #gentoo-portage Alec pointed out that a blacklist would not guarantee a clean build environment to the extent that a whitelist would. Despite this, I was not convinced that a whitelist is necessary and worth the implementation/maintenance costs. To support this, I pointed out that portage seems to work well currently, without a whitelist. Based on this information, I would suggest that the lists, if they get implemented, should exist at both global and per-ebuild levels, and should be optional (not necessarily required). One thing I like about black/override lists (as opposed to whitelists) is that they would serve to document specifically which environment variable(s) a specific build is fragile with regard to. Zac -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
