On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 6:20 AM, Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > Most importantly, this allows us to easily find out which packages > install such files and perform global operations on them. For example, > if a particular user had systemd locations in INSTALL_MASK and changed > his mind, he can easily update his system by rebuilding all packages > inheriting systemd.eclass. > > If all packages installing udev rules start inheriting it, the above > will no longer be correct. Also, the opposite way -- rebuilding > packages installing udev rules -- won't be that easy.
This seems like a bit of overloading. Right now we really lack a good way to figure out what packages COULD install files in a given place - we can only figure out which ones have installed files in that location on our own systems. If we really want that capability then I think the solution is to design it thoughtfully. Sure, some detective work with eclass inheritance might give us clues, but I wouldn't let it be a big driver behind how we use and design eclasses. That said, there might be other valid reasons for keeping udev and systemd separate eclass-wise... Rich
