Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev <gentoo-dev@l.g.o>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: useflag policies
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 19:33:44
Message-Id: CAGfcS_=CLHWyGwm_KGXbezq4N_BnAaz1NQWAxT8V1WTe0dnk9Q@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: useflag policies by Gregory Woodbury
1 On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 3:13 PM, Gregory Woodbury <redwolfe@×××××.com> wrote:
2 > Is a possible solution something like an eselect module to indicate
3 > the preferred
4 > interface kit? It could default to any package that is available with
5 > a sequential
6 > set of preferred order.
7 > Then ebuild would consult the eselect module, and users who care can
8 > select the kit they want, and users who don't care/know get the default.
9
10 That still neglects the case where a user just wanted to say "use the
11 best version of qt for any particular package," which I'd argue is
12 probably the most common use case. It may not make sense to have one
13 global preference system-wide, and managing it per-package is painful.
14 It really does make sense to leave it up to the maintainer, while
15 still letting people either turn off qt entirely if they'd prefer to
16 do so, or override the default implementation when they really want
17 to.
18
19 There is always requiring any package that supports qt to enable
20 either qt4 or qt5 by default, so the typical user who wants qt does
21 nothing, the typical user who doesn't want qt sets USE="-qt4 -qt5",
22 and then anybody who wants to override things per-package can do so.
23 That is simple to define in ebuilds, and you can set REQUIRED_USE to
24 prevent them both from being set. It just means having qt support by
25 default all over the tree and forcing people who don't want it to
26 explicitly turn it off. That is simple to do at least, but not really
27 in keeping with the general spirit of the base profile being a minimal
28 one. And it would still be difficult to do anything at the profile
29 level if it were appropriate to do so.
30
31 --
32 Rich