1 |
Timothy Redaelli <drizzt@g.o> posted |
2 |
200904061132.26894.drizzt@g.o, excerpted below, on Mon, 06 Apr |
3 |
2009 11:32:21 +0200: |
4 |
|
5 |
> I only take the idea. I don't care about who has it ;) |
6 |
|
7 |
Who has it isn't a particular problem, but in the context you mentioned, |
8 |
whether it has been patented unfortunately is. =:^( |
9 |
|
10 |
But thankfully I'm not aware of any Gentoo PM patents, and yes, some way |
11 |
of getting exactly what's applied to the package would be useful. Of |
12 |
course, a simple --pretend yields the package-specific USE flags, but |
13 |
there's no way to see the effect of what's in /etc/portage/env, for |
14 |
instance (and /etc/portage/patches for those still running Ed Catmur's |
15 |
patching scripts stuff, which sure helps when one is grabbing patches off |
16 |
bugs, google, etc, to allow building a particular package with a new gcc, |
17 |
for instance!), without specifically asking. |
18 |
|
19 |
Well, most of it can be seen by studying the emerge output logs, but |
20 |
that's package maintainer level, not something bug wranglers should have |
21 |
to do. If there was a nice neat post-env post-patch-script report that |
22 |
summarized everything nicely for the wranglers, it would certainly help |
23 |
-- and could go a long way toward encouraging integration of something |
24 |
similar to those patch scripts directly in portage, as well. |
25 |
|
26 |
-- |
27 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
28 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
29 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |