| 1 |
On 06/28/11 12:38, Peter Volkov wrote: |
| 2 |
> Hi guys. We've had discussion on optional runtime dependencies in bug |
| 3 |
> 361255, but I think it's worth to have broader discussion of this issue. |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
[SNIP] |
| 6 |
> Comments? |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
I like the USEflag approach. It integrates well with the rest of the |
| 9 |
machinery. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Speaking from experience with "other distros" that have optional |
| 12 |
dependency support - |
| 13 |
be really REALLY sure it's an absolutely optional feature that you |
| 14 |
handle like this. There's nothing worse than spending 15 minutes trying |
| 15 |
to figure out why stuff is broken, just to realize that the mandatory |
| 16 |
optional dependencies were not installed. (Yes, mandatory. But optional. |
| 17 |
Yey!) |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Since we have useflags anyway I don't really see a strong usecase for |
| 20 |
making some useflags different - we even have default-on and default-off |
| 21 |
methods, and if a user doesn't like something it's easy to change |
| 22 |
locally. But more metadata around the useflags might be very convenient. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
> May be instead of ~ introduce three additional prefixes (~ and another |
| 25 |
> two for +~ and -~ cases)? |
| 26 |
That looks a bit weird :) |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
Patrick Lauer http://service.gentooexperimental.org |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Gentoo Council Member and Evangelist |
| 35 |
Part of Gentoo Benchmarks, Forensics, PostgreSQL, KDE herds |
Archives