Bug 387067

Summary:	sys-apps/portage-2.2: sets/portage.conf should use a layer of indirection for implementation classes
Product:	Portage Development	Reporter:	Zac Medico <zmedico>
Component:	Core - Configuration	Assignee:	Portage team <dev-portage>
Status:	CONFIRMED ---
Severity:	enhancement	CC:	esigra
Priority:	Normal
Version:	unspecified
Hardware:	All
OS:	All
Whiteboard:
Package list:		Runtime testing required:	---
Bug Depends on:
Bug Blocks:	144480

Description Zac Medico gentoo-dev

2011-10-13 20:40:28 UTC

Currently, /usr/share/portage/config/sets/portage.conf contains direct references to the class names that implement the sets. This is inconvenient if any other package manager wants to support this type of configuration file (which would be required in order to know the whole content of @world if the user has sets in world_sets).

We can solve this if we add a new file that maps set type aliases to implementation classes, and having sets/portage.conf refer to the alias instead of the implementation class. For example, /usr/share/portage/config/sets_aliases/portage.conf could contain alias in the first column and implementation classes in the second column as follows:

container portage.sets.base.DummyPackageSet
world_file portage.sets.files.WorldSelectedSet
system_packages portage.sets.profiles.PackagesSystemSet
security_vuln portage.sets.security.NewAffectedSet
static_file portage.sets.files.StaticFileSet

Comment 1 Marius Mauch 2011-10-14 06:24:33 UTC

Before adding this please verify that other PMs actually *want* to support this type of config file (including variable expansion config values), otherwise it's just added complexity for nothing. For a really portable solution a new type of config file might be needed.