| 1 |
On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 23:33:44 +0300 |
| 2 |
Petteri Räty <betelgeuse@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Bo Ørsted Andresen kirjoitti: |
| 5 |
> > On Monday 22 September 2008 22:25:20 Petteri Räty wrote: |
| 6 |
> >>> If you mean something like |
| 7 |
> >>> |
| 8 |
> >>> built_with_use cat/foo coolfeature || ewarn "bar will be more |
| 9 |
> >>> useful if you rebuild cat/foo with USE=coolfeature" |
| 10 |
> >>> |
| 11 |
> >>> then you can use |
| 12 |
> >>> |
| 13 |
> >>> has_version 'cat/foo[coolfeature]' || ... |
| 14 |
> >>> |
| 15 |
> >>> instead. |
| 16 |
> >> What does this report if cat/foo does not have coolfeature use |
| 17 |
> >> flag in some version? Meaning can this support cases which need |
| 18 |
> >> --missing true. |
| 19 |
> > |
| 20 |
> > False. If for instance coolfeature was made optional in >=pv you |
| 21 |
> > can use logic like: |
| 22 |
> > |
| 23 |
> > if has_version '>=cat/foo-pv' && ! has_version |
| 24 |
> > 'cat/foo[coolfeature]'; then ewarn '...' |
| 25 |
> > fi |
| 26 |
> > |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> I think this should cover all the current functionality with |
| 29 |
> built_with_use. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
This is just an ugly hack. Think about a package that has coolfeature |
| 32 |
useflag removed and enabled by default for a couple of releases because |
| 33 |
it wouldn't build without it and once upstream sorted out everything |
| 34 |
the useflag is coming back. Missing useflags that are assumed to be |
| 35 |
enabled have nothing to do with the package version being greater than |
| 36 |
a given number. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
I would *really* prefer having big warnings when using built_with_use |
| 39 |
in EAPI 2; that way we can see how things are in practice and then |
| 40 |
maybe make built_with_use die for a later eapi or once all the tree is |
| 41 |
converted to eapi 2 remove it. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
Alexis. |
Archives