| 1 |
On 03/19/2010 10:57 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 03:54:28 -0500 |
| 3 |
> Dale<rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 4 |
>> Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 5 |
>>> On Thu, 18 Mar 2010 23:17:17 +0100 |
| 6 |
>>> Ben de Groot<yngwin@g.o> wrote: |
| 7 |
>>> |
| 8 |
>>>> Because it is extremely useless to the great majority of users. |
| 9 |
>>>> |
| 10 |
>>> Most packages in the tree are useless to the great majority of |
| 11 |
>>> users. |
| 12 |
>> |
| 13 |
>> Which is why most users don't install everything. I have about 1000 |
| 14 |
>> packages installed here. The packages installed are either something |
| 15 |
>> I use or a dependency of something I use. What exactly is this being |
| 16 |
>> installed for again? If nothing depends on it, there is no need to |
| 17 |
>> have it. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> It's being installed because it's a dependency of something you use. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> Replace Python with any other library and we wouldn't be having this |
| 22 |
> discussion. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
It's weird that we have this discussion, that's true. Why don't you |
| 25 |
guys simply do what you did before when Qt3 was still in the tree? Qt3 |
| 26 |
applications depended on x11-libs/qt:3, Qt4 ones on x11-libs/qt:4 |
| 27 |
(before the Qt4 ebuild split). |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
It seems very obvious and straightforward that the same applies here. |
| 30 |
And if a package offers both Python 2 and Python 3 compatibility, it |
| 31 |
should depend on whatever the upstream of that package considers best. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Also, we had a "qt" and "qt4" USE flag before. Why not "python" and |
| 34 |
"python3" flags? That's an additional way ebuilds can choose deps. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
You guys always make easy decisions so complicated. :P |
Archives