Re: [gentoo-dev] use.force support

[Jason Stubbs]

On Wednesday 15 June 2005 20:43, Sven Wegener wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 07:50:13PM -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > Sven Wegener wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 06:56:43PM -0400, Ned Ludd wrote:
> > > >I'm in favor of this. Would you mind calling it package.autouse,
> > > >package.use.auto or are you set on .force?
> > >
> > > As Mike already wrote those names are too confusing with the automatic
> > > activated USE flags. We already had some suggestions in this thread,
> > > but none of them actually matched the purpose of the file. At least in
> > > my opinion. use.force matches it best, but the "force" part is a quite
> > > hard term. How about use.profile? Because these USE flags are activated
> > > or needed by the profile.
> >
> > How about use.required, since they're required by the profile?
>
> Sounds good to me. use.required sounds softer than use.force but still
> has this "touch me and things may break horribly" bit.

So use.required it is then. To recap, use.required forces USE flags to be set 
and can only be overridden in a sub-profile. Transition from the current 
USE_EXPAND method is by simply copying the relevant USE flags to the new 
use.required file.

Currently missing from the USE_EXPAND method but what also needs to be done is 
to add the alternative system USE flags to use.mask. Also, this still hasn't 
addressed the QA notices output during merges. For this, I'll add support for 
${PORTDIR}/profiles/use.internal which will list USE flags which can be used 
anywhere without having to be specified in IUSE; that is, they can be used 
with useq, SRC_URI and *DEPEND.

Note, use.internal doesn't and shouldn't cover the normal USE_EXPAND flags. 
I'll cover those shortly in another post.

Regards,
Jason Stubbs