| Summary: | assume-digest does not work as documented | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Portage Development | Reporter: | Alex <nesl247> |
| Component: | Core | Assignee: | Portage team <dev-portage> |
| Status: | RESOLVED DUPLICATE | ||
| Severity: | normal | ||
| Priority: | High | ||
| Version: | unspecified | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
|
Description
Alex
2007-02-13 21:06:42 UTC
This report doesn't make sense to me. What do you not understand? According to make.conf.example, the assume-digests feature controls whether digest.assumed happens in ebuild. Well, it doesn't seem to be working according to it's description in make.conf.example.. Thus when you FEATURES="-assume-digests", ebuild <ebuild> digest doesn't remove the existing digests, and redigest completely.. (In reply to comment #2) > when you FEATURES="-assume-digests", ebuild <ebuild> digest doesn't remove the > existing digests, and redigest completely.. Right, you need to use the `ebuild --force foo.ebuild digest` for that, which needs to be documented. We should also document the fact that digests are automatically assumed for files that do not currently exist in ${DISTDIR}. You don't need to just document that, but you need to fix the documentation in make.conf.example then. But why not fix it to act as the name suggests? (In reply to comment #4) > But why not fix it to act as the name suggests? Changing the behavior of existing features that large numbers of people depend on often leads to confusion. I doubt that the change you're suggesting can be done without lots of people noticing and getting upset. Oh well, I just figured the name would match the function. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 191645 *** |
