1 |
On Sun, 2005-10-02 at 02:10 +0200, Daniel Stiefelmaier wrote: |
2 |
> >We've discussed adding this to metadata.xml a few times in the past, |
3 |
> >but every time there was opposition from a vocal minority of one who |
4 |
> >claimed that USE flags should always do exactly the same thing for |
5 |
> >every package. |
6 |
> > |
7 |
> > |
8 |
> why do minorities rule? |
9 |
> Actually i agree that in general use flags should have a consistent meaning. |
10 |
> But anyway, if "perl" adds support for perl, the user might want to know |
11 |
> what it is good for in this package. or "plugins" could list the plugins |
12 |
> that would be added. |
13 |
> |
14 |
> What tool ever would display the use flags description, it could use |
15 |
> those from |
16 |
> /usr/portage/profiles/use.desc by default, which may be overwriten in |
17 |
> metadata.xml |
18 |
|
19 |
Well, I think that it may be easier to simply add this information to |
20 |
use.local.desc, as it already defines local USE flags. The idea would |
21 |
be that use.local.desc overrides use.desc when there is a conflict. |
22 |
Then portage could, via a flag, show the use descriptions for each USE |
23 |
flag per package. |
24 |
|
25 |
-- |
26 |
Chris Gianelloni |
27 |
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead/QA Manager |
28 |
Games - Developer |
29 |
Gentoo Linux |