| 1 |
Maciej Mrozowski wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sunday 02 of August 2015 21:37:36 Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 3 |
> | The approach qt4=qt4 |
| 4 |
> | and qt5=qt5 seems simpler on the surface, but it means that users end |
| 5 |
> | up having to set tons of per-package configurations when they don't |
| 6 |
> | actually care which one they use, |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> I will risk a thesis that if they didn't care, they wouldn't have chosen |
| 9 |
> Gentoo... |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> regards |
| 12 |
> MM |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
You may lose that one if I'm seeing your point correctly. See Alan and |
| 17 |
my earlier replies. I have both qt4 and qt5 set and I leave which is |
| 18 |
best to use to the devs to control in the ebuild. If for example qt5 |
| 19 |
does not work well for a package, let the ebuild pick qt4 for that |
| 20 |
package. If qt5 works reliably, then build with qt5. If I have a |
| 21 |
problem with it, then I can set it in package.use if needed, doesn't |
| 22 |
build or function correctly or I want qt5 even if it isn't stable. As |
| 23 |
things switch to qt5 more, I don't have to do anything except let the |
| 24 |
updates roll out as they become stable and the dev sets that in the |
| 25 |
ebuild. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Keep in mind, devs already do a LOT of the selection process. |
| 28 |
Otherwise, we could set any and every USE flag and package combination |
| 29 |
there is without any restrictions. In other words, we could have USE |
| 30 |
flag soup even if it is known that two or more USE flags clash. As it |
| 31 |
is, if a dev knows two flags clash, we get a nifty error message and |
| 32 |
then we get to figure out how to get it to work right, sometimes |
| 33 |
portage's error message is cryptic to say the least. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
If I took your point wrong, my apologies. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
Lowly user. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
Dale |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
:-) :-) |
Archives