Re: Sets, subsets, syspkgs, and MK*

[Izumi Tsutsui <tsutsui%ceres.dti.ne.jp@localhost>]

> > > You don't want to waste your precious weekend to apply unrelated binary
> > > updates against 1,000 machines.  Does this answer your question?
> > 
> > You don't mention how "Sets, subsets, syspkgs, and MK*"
> > avoids annoying weekend?
> 
> Did you read only those 2 lines? :)
> 
> - Global binary patch affects all users.
> 
> - Partial binary patch affects users who use its function.
> 
>   ==> Partial binary patch is better for users than global binary patch.

Could you show exact example of usage how global patches
and partial patches can be generated by MK* variable settings?
Users can still choose necessary patches from global one as cube says,
unless builders blindly generate patches from whole two sets of DESTDIR.

> > Probably you just want to make subset builds with MK or USE variables
> > work properly? If once it works, binary patches for subset builds
> > can still be generated from two set of DESTDIR with the same MK_foo
> > or USE_foo settings. Is this your intention?
> 
> I don't really understand your question here, but:
> 
> Binary patches generated from 2 DESTdIRs - yes.
> 
> "MK or USE" - I'm trying to realize that MK is better than USE, in that
> MK doesn't change signature, meaning binary patch friendly.
> 
> If you create a binary patch of YP code in libc, how do you call it?

It's better to mention how "a binary patch of YP code in libc"
can or cannot be generated by MK_* or USE_* variable in your idea.
---
Izumi Tsutsui