On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 11:29:05AM +1300, Kent Fredric wrote: > On Thu, 29 Sep 2016 23:56:34 +0200 > Andy Mender <andymenderu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I believe the main problem comes from /bin/bash and potential symlinks that > > would need to be introduced as part of the slotting. > > In a pinch you could probably get away with > calling :1 /usr/bin/bash-4.4 instead of /usr/bin/bash, and then > offering no luxuries beyond that, leaving it up to the user to do the rest. > > Then you could test it in ~/ with PATH + Symlink in ~/bin/ ... maybe. > > There would just not be much point, because the real purpose of testing > 4.4 is not for fear of it breaking user experience ( which is a > problem, but not the primary motive ), but for making everything else > that runs with bash runs OK. > > Maybe you could do some horrible QA Violation like USE=multislot > which changes the slot from :0 and adds the -suffix at the same time. > > But I still don't think its a useful or good idea.
I am against it as well. The purpose of this testing is to eventually move to bash-4.4 being stable and replacing bash-4.3, so slotting it would make that more complex later. William
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
