List Archive: gentoo-dev
Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.c.f. bug 424647
Alec Warner wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 1:27 PM, Ben de Groot<firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> On 18 March 2010 20:24, Fabian Groffen<email@example.com> wrote:
>>> On 18-03-2010 20:20:02 +0100, Thomas Sachau wrote:
>>>> There are 2 ways to fix this issue:
>>>> -fix the dependency string for those packages (including the lines in distutils.eclass)
>>>> or (since Arfrever claims current portage behaviour is wrong)
>>>> -change portage behaviour to be satisfied with a python slot and to not require other slots.
>>> Since the last option will take time in any case, I guess the first
>>> option is the best to achieve the desired goal: make sure Python 3 stays
>>> as far away as possible from any system that doesn't need it.
>> And the best way to do that is to package.mask it.
> The maintainer has chosen not to mask it in gentoo-x86, which means
> users are empowered to mask it locally and everyone who is complaining
> about getting python3 installed on their system should mask it
> locally. This is how users work around other defaults in the tree
> they don't agree with (USE flags, KEYWORDS, etc.) I don't get why
> this is a big deal at all or why people are unable to solve this
>> Ben de Groot
>> Gentoo Linux Qt project lead developer
I think this is because people that use Gentoo do so because it doesn't
install things they don't need. Why install a package that is used by
no other package? It's pointless.
I would also add, if it gets installed and is used by no other package,
--depclean should remove it. Putting it in package.mask locally is sort
of silly in my opinion. There will come a day, maybe way off in the
future, that something will need it. Then you have to edit the file
again so portage can install it.
This just seems to be adding either more work or unneeded packages.
This is a users $0.02 worth.