| 1 |
On Mon, Dec 26, 2005 at 11:28:17PM -0500, Chandler Carruth wrote: |
| 2 |
> It occurs to me that this could be (to an extent) accomplished by having |
| 3 |
> a few more "specialized" subprofiles for x86: base, desktop, gnome, and kde. |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> base - as the name implies, a _basic_ starting point... very similar to |
| 6 |
> server profiles, etc. veeery minimal. |
| 7 |
> desktop - almost identical to the current USE flags -- what Joe Q. User |
| 8 |
> "should" have to be safe, and have programs function as expected. |
| 9 |
> gnome / kde - slight specializations of the above to tailor the use |
| 10 |
> flags for one desktop environ or the other.. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Problems? |
| 13 |
> 1) heavier usage and depth of the profile, making where things come in |
| 14 |
> more and more obscure. |
| 15 |
> 2) could lead to proliferation of environment tailored "desktop" |
| 16 |
> derivatives. (xfce, fluxbox, the list could go on) This may not be a |
| 17 |
> problem as many distros have successfully divided between KDE and Gnome, |
| 18 |
> and the base / desktop profiles would allow users ways to customize, as |
| 19 |
> always. |
| 20 |
> 3) there is _no_ functionality added by any of this, only |
| 21 |
> "user-friendliness" after a fashion, and as such, perhaps it should all |
| 22 |
> be chucked in favor of having users competently declare their own global |
| 23 |
> USE flags during the install, however I doubt that'll get very far. *shrug* |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
4) need for the ability to inherit multiple parent profiles. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Otherwise, x86 desktop profile is not guranteed in anyway to reflect |
| 28 |
sparc desktop profile (yes, somewhat the case now). |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
A gnome desktop profile would make sense imo, but from a work |
| 31 |
standpoint is totally dependant on ability to inherit multiple |
| 32 |
parents. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
~harring |
Archives