| 1 |
On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 14:37:19 -0400 |
| 2 |
Alexandre Rostovtsev <tetromino@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> That suggests that the EAPI ought to define a second category of |
| 4 |
> USE_EXPAND flags, one that has a different treatment of (+)/(-). |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Something like the following: |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> A dependency on $foo[linguas_bar(+)] would be considered satisfied by |
| 9 |
> an ebuild X matching $foo iff: |
| 10 |
> 1. X has linguas_bar in IUSE and enabled; or |
| 11 |
> 2. X does not have linguas_bar in IUSE, but there exists an ebuild Y |
| 12 |
> (which may or may not equal X) matching $foo such that Y has at least |
| 13 |
> one linguas_* flag in IUSE. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
That's sensitive to old versions ebuilds being removed from the tree, so |
| 16 |
it's utterly unworkable. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
-- |
| 19 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives