On Thursday, March 17, 2011 17:59:44 Kevin F. Quinn wrote: > On Sun, 13 Mar 2011 17:38:29 -0400 > > "Anthony G. Basile" <bluen...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > On 03/13/2011 04:19 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > > On Saturday, March 12, 2011 07:36:35 Paweł Hajdan, Jr. wrote: > > >> I wonder why pax-utils.eclass uses elog instead of just einfo. An > > >> > > >> example message looks like this: > > >> * Fallback PaX marking -m > > >> * out/Release/chrome > > >> > > >> IMHO it's not very useful in the elog messages, but maybe there are > > >> scenarios in which it is useful. > > >> > > >> My idea is to just replace all elogs with einfos in > > >> pax-utils.eclass. What do you think? > > > > > > i think it depends on the person. for people who dont use > > > grsec/PaX, they probably could care less and never see this > > > output. for people who do, they probably do want to see this. > > > > > > maybe have it `elog` only when [[ $(uname -r) == *-grsec* ]] > > > -mike > > > > blueness@yellowness ~ $ uname -r > > 2.6.37-hardened-r5 > > > > so you need == *-hardened-* > > I'd suggest doing something like: > > use hardened && elog ... > > There's an argument that it's better to make decisions according to > make.conf settings rather than the host system configuration, not > least to cater for people doing cross-builds. Assuming cross builds > work at all; I've not tried that for a long time.
in general, yes. but this would have the unpleasant side effect of having IUSE=hardened show up for all packages that inherit the eclass. also, this code is run at the pkg_* stage, so it's not the normal src host feature detection. and we're talking about minor output behavior. -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
