Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Andrew Ross <aross@×××××××××××.au>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] xchat's use of local USE flag xchatnogtk
Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2004 07:16:22
Message-Id: 1081322178.5922.164.camel@localhost
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] xchat's use of local USE flag xchatnogtk by Jason Huebel
1 On Wed, 2004-04-07 at 06:54, Jason Huebel wrote:
2 > Well, if you tie xchat to the global gtk USE flag, someone who installs
3 > xchat may wonder why it isn't working for them when they don't have gtk
4 > in their USE flags. Has anyone actually taken a look at xchat-text... UGH.
5
6 It's ugly but it's there, so IMHO the ebuild should build the text
7 client by default and look at the global gtk use flag to build the gui.
8
9 Please note the very deliberate IMHO there :-) Also, see below (my last
10 comment)
11
12 > I for one don't have gtk in my USE flags (I prefer KDE/Qt), but I use
13 > the gtk interface for XChat. The default interface that most people
14 > expect when installing xchat is the GTK interface, not text. Maybe a
15 > better choice would be to have an "xchattextonly" USE flag or something
16 > similar.
17
18 The problem with user expectations in this case is related to the name
19 of the program, isn't it? If it was called irc_client we wouldn't be
20 having this discussion, and the optional gui would be built with +gtk. I
21 wonder if we can file an upstream bug to have the name changed... jk :-)
22
23 Jason, you prefer KDE/Qt but want the gtk interface to xchat? Isn't that
24 exactly what package.keywords is designed for? (please correct me if I
25 am misunderstanding its purpose)
26
27 > I can just see the bug reports come flooding in for something so
28 > silly... :-)
29
30 You see it as silly, I (and some other users) see it as inconsistent
31 behaviour regarding global use flags. Admittedly, xchat is a difficult
32 case, which is why I agree that this shouldn't be filed as a bug without
33 discussion first (hence my original post). In light of both the replies
34 to this thread, and the comments in a semi-related (closed) bug
35 (#26427), I've decided to let it drop.
36
37 Thank you all for your feedback.
38
39 Cheers
40
41 Andrew
42
43
44 --
45 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list