1 |
Martin, |
2 |
|
3 |
Your comment makes it sound like leaving foo out of USE is the same as |
4 |
"-foo"... but I get quite a different story. I would actually prefer |
5 |
that USE behave in such a predictable manner, either meaning that not |
6 |
including foo in the USE automatically includes foo features or |
7 |
automatically disables foo features, but I found that its completely |
8 |
unpredictable... let me use QT as an example: |
9 |
|
10 |
with NO use flags, qt compiled (for me) without GIF support and without |
11 |
CUPS support (these two I paid attention to in particular, but I'm sure |
12 |
lots of other build flags got changed too). |
13 |
|
14 |
When I saw this, I emerged cups and gif, then built QT again (without |
15 |
changing USE flags). Same thing, still no GIF or CUPS support. So I |
16 |
added "gif" and "cups" to use and it worked fine. |
17 |
|
18 |
What I just described agrees with your comment, but when I was building |
19 |
KDE, I noticed quite a few gnome and gtk dependencies... then I went and |
20 |
added "-gtk" and "-gnome" to my use flags, and the deps went away (I'm |
21 |
not 100% if it was KDE or not, but that's beside the point, the point |
22 |
was that I had to explicity tell emerge NOT to include gnome or gtk |
23 |
deps, yet I also had to tell it to explicity INCLUDE the cups and gif |
24 |
deps". |
25 |
|
26 |
This behavior confuses me, as I never know "what I'm missing" so to |
27 |
speak until its too late. Is there a way to make emerge behave more |
28 |
predictably? Either by automatically excluding ALL possible use flags |
29 |
unless stated otherwise, OR by including all possible use flags unless |
30 |
stated otherwise? |
31 |
|
32 |
A gentleman on this list (Sami) gave a good suggestion to me which was |
33 |
to add ALL of the use flags in alphabetical order to my USE variable, |
34 |
then run down the list adding a "-" before each one I didn't want. This |
35 |
seems to be the only way to garuntee the behavior... which is suboptimal |
36 |
at best. |
37 |
|
38 |
Thoughts? Comments? |
39 |
|
40 |
Best, |
41 |
-Riyad |
42 |
|
43 |
> -----Original Message----- |
44 |
> From: Martin Schlemmer [mailto:azarah@g.o] |
45 |
> Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2003 2:02 PM |
46 |
> To: M. Zuelsdorff |
47 |
> Cc: Gentoo-Dev |
48 |
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] mplayer with dvdread |
49 |
> |
50 |
> |
51 |
> On Thu, 2003-04-10 at 23:32, M. Zuelsdorff wrote: |
52 |
> > No, I don't make use of "USE" at all, since it's one of the really |
53 |
> > annoying |
54 |
> > parts of the Gentoo distribution. There are thousands of |
55 |
> packages in the |
56 |
> > portage tree but not a single line on which USE-var is |
57 |
> related to which |
58 |
> > package. |
59 |
> |
60 |
> The logic was that if 'foo' is in USE, then support for 'foo' |
61 |
> gets build. If 'foo' not in USE, then support for 'foo' gets |
62 |
> disabled. |
63 |
> |
64 |
> I think you really need to go and do some reading, and |
65 |
> re-evaluate your stance to using USE ... |
66 |
> |
67 |
> |
68 |
> Regards, |
69 |
> |
70 |
> -- |
71 |
> |
72 |
> Martin Schlemmer |
73 |
> Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop/System Team Developer |
74 |
> Cape Town, South Africa |
75 |
> |
76 |
> |
77 |
> |
78 |
> |
79 |
|
80 |
|
81 |
-- |
82 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |