| 1 |
On Monday 18 October 2004 15:30, Jochen Maes wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> I have to agree on Kurt and as having -@KDE and -@GNOME should imply |
| 5 |
> that X isn't installed, there are other window managers who can be used |
| 6 |
> also (in this example). If we do now -kde and -gnome, that wouldn't |
| 7 |
> imply that X won't be installed right? |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> I think that people should have the option to do -@GROUP. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
I agree that the problem is with the example, not with the features. The |
| 12 |
example however exposes some issues. For example the point what a |
| 13 |
negation of a group means. Does it mean that the elements of the group |
| 14 |
are undefined? (And thus allowing higher level definitions to come |
| 15 |
through similar to not having a useflag in make.conf) or does it mean |
| 16 |
that the useflag is negated? Maybe it should be specifyable what negation |
| 17 |
means on a useflag basis. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Paul |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
Paul de Vrieze |
| 23 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 24 |
Mail: pauldv@g.o |
| 25 |
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net |
Archives