| 1 |
On Sat, 2004-04-17 at 08:52, Stuart Herbert wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Saturday 17 April 2004 15:54, John Nilsson wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Sorry I should have been more specific. I meant that "-X" explicitly |
| 4 |
> > states no X, so a package such as tk should fail because it depends on |
| 5 |
> > X. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> USE flags do not work that way. They enable or disable *optional* features |
| 8 |
> only. They do not disable dependencies that a package always requires. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> It's a historical convention, and one that can cause confusion ;-) |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Best regards, |
| 13 |
> Stu |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Admittedly, however, a lot of the ebuilds which use the tcltk USE flag |
| 16 |
should be checked now to see if they can handle: tcltk? ( X? tk : tcl ) |
| 17 |
type conventions. I haven't looked closely in a while, but if I |
| 18 |
remember right, there's a LOT of them that would benefit from the new |
| 19 |
nestable USE flag syntax. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Oh, while I'm at it -- (deedra & jon, stop me if I'm wrong :) -- Gentoo |
| 22 |
needs developers to handle dev-lang/tk, dev-lang/tcl and dev-tcltk |
| 23 |
packages. There's nobody who's a regular dependable maintainer for |
| 24 |
them. I think 2 people would be a desirable thing. You should probably |
| 25 |
wait to see if deedra and/or jon (dmwater and/or avenj, that is) respond |
| 26 |
and then write to recruiters@gentoo if they approve. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
ciao, |
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
Seemant Kulleen |
| 31 |
http://dev.gentoo.org/~seemant |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Public Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x3458780E |
| 34 |
Key fingerprint = 23A9 7CB5 9BBB 4F8D 549B 6593 EDA2 65D8 3458 780E |
Archives