1 |
Am Dienstag 01 Mai 2012, 00:15:12 schrieb Ciaran McCreesh: |
2 |
> On Tue, 1 May 2012 00:14:15 +0200 |
3 |
> |
4 |
> "Andreas K. Huettel" <dilfridge@g.o> wrote: |
5 |
> > * package.use.stable.mask and package.use.stable.force support, as |
6 |
> > discussed on gentoo-dev (there and on IRC feedback was pretty much |
7 |
> > positive) |
8 |
> > |
9 |
> > http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_6c492ae43ad7c70cef6aa8ac34911ad |
10 |
> > f.xml |
11 |
> |
12 |
> I'm against this one in a "quick" EAPI, unless you can get a reference |
13 |
> implementation and extensive testing on possible use scenarios done in |
14 |
> time. I strongly suspect this will end up having the problems that |
15 |
> REQUIRED_USE had when it was shoved in at the last minute without |
16 |
> anyone having properly tried it out... |
17 |
|
18 |
I cannot say much myself about the complexity of the reference implementation, |
19 |
however the concept itself is imho pretty straightforward and (in particular) |
20 |
not intrusive. |
21 |
|
22 |
The main problem that I see with REQUIRED_USE is that it generates |
23 |
restrictions that cannot be resolved automatically. Not sure how anything like |
24 |
that can happen here, where we do not offer any choices but deliberately only |
25 |
limit them. |
26 |
|
27 |
-- |
28 |
|
29 |
Andreas K. Huettel |
30 |
Gentoo Linux developer |
31 |
dilfridge@g.o |
32 |
http://www.akhuettel.de/ |