-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 12:30:35 +0000
"Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > In any case, abusing DEPEND isn't a mechanism for implementing use
> > requirements. You should use the mechanism that's designed for use
> > requirements to do use requirements, which means waiting for EAPI 4
> > and pkg_pretend, or just follow existing policy and pick one in the
> > case of a conflict.
> Abusing depend is a good way to do this, until we get better tools.
No, it's not, because it doesn't work. Assuming self deps are legal in
the || ( myself myself-bin ) case, they can't do what you want for use
requirements. myself[foo] would be met when building with USE=-foo so
long as myself[foo] was installed originally, and it wouldn't be met
unless myself were already installed.
> I have to agree with Brian's proposal and say that in this particular
> case, the best solution is required_use and not pkg_pretend.
required_use may theoretically allow a package manager to do cycle
breaking if all the relevant packages are updated to export information
about which flags are and are not safe to toggle, but since no-one's
proposed exporting that information or has even worked out exactly what
the requirements would be for that to happen, and since pkg_pretend is
required anyway for other things, just going with pkg_pretend for now
is the sensible solution.
Of course, this is all irrelevant since at the current rate of progress
Portage is two years off any of this being available for developers
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.15 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----