1 |
On Tuesday 14 February 2006 21:44, Alec Warner wrote: |
2 |
> Brian Harring wrote: |
3 |
> > IUSE- eapi bump it, I pushed for the var for exactly crap like this ;) |
4 |
> > |
5 |
> > The only (imo) reason to add the USE_ORDER chunks is because users use |
6 |
> > -* to castrate auto-use; auto-use is dead in 2.1, so the main reason |
7 |
> > for using -* is gone. |
8 |
> > |
9 |
> > So... really worth adding another chunk of metadata for this? |
10 |
> |
11 |
> Well that problem would be, no one wants to modify everything in |
12 |
> app-portage/ :). If my portage EAPI is 1, but my tools don't support |
13 |
> processing +- in IUSE, how does EAPI help me here? The support check is |
14 |
> only for portage_const, so the tool remains <sensored>. Unless I'm |
15 |
> missing something. |
16 |
|
17 |
Nah, Brian's right. Tools need to follow. Backwards compatibility isn't so |
18 |
important there. The important thing is that portage keeps on living. |
19 |
|
20 |
-- |
21 |
Jason Stubbs |
22 |
-- |
23 |
gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list |