On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 9:45 PM, Vlastimil Babka <caster@g.o> wrote:
>
> I think it's better to prevent this rather than waste time with bug
> reports like that. I asked Zac on IRC whether portage could filter such
> flags. He suggested using use.mask in profiles. Well since ARCH is also
> set by a profile, why not. Although a really persistent and stupid user
> could use.unmask, it's better than no protection. And then we can think
> how to replace the current ARCH->USE flag system with e.g. USE_EXPAND.
> What do you think?
>

Seems like an acceptable workaround.

For future EAPIs, ARCH could be a regular USE_EXPANDed flag as you
suggest, and package managers could filter any flag in USE which is
not listed in IUSE.

Regards,
-- 
Santiago M. Mola
Jabber ID: cooldwind@...