Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] iuse defaults example
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 09:07:40
Message-Id: 200707100504.49957.vapier@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] iuse defaults example by "Petteri Räty"
1 On Tuesday 10 July 2007, Petteri Räty wrote:
2 > Mike Frysinger kirjoitti:
3 > > On Tuesday 10 July 2007, William Hubbs wrote:
4 > >> On Mon, Jul 09, 2007 at 11:26:19PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
5 > >>> As for IUSE defaults... There were objections against that feature on
6 > >>> the grounds that it's unnecessary and increased maintenance. Do they
7 > >>> really offer any benefit over package.use?
8 > >>
9 > >> Would iuse defaults not be appropriate when a certain use flag is
10 > >> recommended as the default for most users for a package??
11 > >
12 > > other examples that make sense and are a pain with package.use:
13 > > - local USE flags (suddenly not so local huh)
14 >
15 > betelgeuse@pena /usr/portage/profiles $ cat base/package.use
16 > # This file requires >=portage-2.1.2 (see bug #61732)
17 >
18 > # Strongly recommended, otherwise all logos, icons, etc. appear in b/w.
19 > app-editors/emacs xpm
20 > app-editors/emacs-cvs xpm
21 >
22 > Seems local to me...
23
24 you missed the point ... ideally local USE flags should not appear outside of
25 an ebuild. if i had a solution for it, i'd propose getting rid of
26 use.local.desc ...
27
28 > > - local USE flags and changing names
29 >
30 > Normally you would only have to change base/package.use
31
32 "normally" doesnt cut it. package.use is stackable and can appear in any
33 profile directory which means these flags can be listed anywhere.
34
35 > > - defaults based on version (feature sucked <= 1.x and then rocked >=
36 > > 2.x)
37 >
38 > package.use should accept version atoms
39 >
40 > > - developing new ebuilds for personal use
41 >
42 > /etc/portage/package.use
43 >
44 > > - developing new ebuilds for merging into tree (btw: need to update all
45 > > these other files in profiles/ instead of just committing the one ebuild)
46 >
47 > base/package.use
48
49 your replies have just backed up my point: it's a [pain]ita when it should be
50 a [pleasent]ita.
51 -mike

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature