Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: JR Boyens <jboyens@××××××××.org>
To: gentoo-dev@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] USE flag swiss army knife
Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 01:26:15
Message-Id: 20020521062806.GA27243@fooninja.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] USE flag swiss army knife by Michael Thompson
1 Good work, I'm impressed. An addition to gentoolkit, maybe?
2
3 --
4 JR Boyens
5 jboyens@××××××××.org
6
7
8 On Mon, May 20, 2002 at 09:19:24PM -0500 or thereabouts, Michael Thompson wrote:
9 > I whipped up this script a while back for personal use, but didn't clean it up
10 > enough for public consumption until now. My girlfriend has been bugging me
11 > to do this, and I never heard from Bob Phan about whether or not he was going
12 > to make a command-line version of his nice GUI USE generator (don't want to
13 > step on anyone's toes), so here is a tool/flamebait for you to check out and
14 > comment on:
15 >
16 > usetookit is a bash script that provides several functions:
17 > ushow - lists the contents of your USE variable
18 > udesc - lists descriptions for one of more USE variables
19 > uadd - add a USE flag (enabled or disabled) to your USE variable
20 > urm - remove a USE flag from your USE variable
21 > use-update - an etc-update-like utility that will interactively remove
22 > depreciated USE flags, then interactively add new USE flags, based on
23 > use.desc. It keeps a cache of the contents of use.desc so that it will not
24 > keep bugging you every time you run it about new USE flags that you chose not
25 > to put in your USE variable.
26 >
27 > To use this tool, place it in root's path, then create symlinks to the
28 > functions you want to use:
29 > e.g.
30 > # ln -s usetoolkit use-update
31 > Run usetoolkit by itself to get help.
32 >
33 > Please keep in mind that my bash skills are practically non-existant, but that
34 > this tool works (for me at least) and doesn't have any bugs that I know of.
35 > Nevertheless, back up your make.conf before trying this.
36 >
37 > Yes, I know the code is ugly and horribly inefficient. Please let me know
38 > what else you think about it.
39 >
40 > -- Michael Thompson