On Fri, 2010-04-23 at 22:31 -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 04/23/2010 05:43 AM, Sebastian Luther wrote:
> > Someone might come up with some logic to detect new use flags in
> > *DEPEND, but this looks like a hack to me.
> 
> It doesn't seem too bad to me.
> 
> > The clean solution is to
> > store the unevaluated string.
> 
> Do you want to do this for $PKGDIR/Packages as well? We've always
> evaluated USE conditionals in there since we were copying the
> behavior of the older genpkgindex tool and that's how it behaved.
> 
> Also note that if we want to rely on having unevaluated strings then
> we'll probably want to try to get alternative package managers to
> behave the same way (maybe specify it in PMS).
> 
> > Question is: Does anyone have a good argument to not use the old
> > behavior again?

space and ease of parsing for minimal pkg mergers.


> > 
> > Sebastian
> > 
> > [1] commit e6be6590e99522f9be69e2af8eff87919d9bf31f on 2010-02-14
> 
> I think we'll have to handle the evaluated strings anyway since this
> code has already been released and stabilized in portage-2.1.8.x,
> and USE conditionals have been evaluate in $PKGDIR/Packages for even
> longer. Because of this, I see little or no benefit in changing it
> back to unevaluated strings at this point.

Good. Thanks for not reverting back to those old behaviors.