| 1 |
On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 17:08:59 +0200 |
| 2 |
Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> >>>>> On Wed, 12 Aug 2015, Alexis Ballier wrote: |
| 4 |
> > i.e. something that really tells the PM how to automate the choice: |
| 5 |
> > - 'qt5 -> !qt4' is rather straightforward to solve and tells the PM |
| 6 |
> > how (note that it is not equivalent to 'qt4 -> !qt5') |
| 7 |
> > - '^^ ( qt5 qt4 )' requires the PM to make a choice in order to |
| 8 |
> > automate it |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> I was thinking about some syntax like this: |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> REQUIRED_USE="|| ( +foo bar ) ^^ ( +qt5 -qt4 )" |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> The package manager would first evaluate each group in REQUIRED_USE |
| 15 |
> with the original set of USE flags. If that doesn't evaluate to true, |
| 16 |
> retry with flags changed as indicated by the + and - signs. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
The problem with REQUIRED_USE was someone having an idea and not |
| 19 |
implementing it and trying it out before inflicting it upon people. Why |
| 20 |
not start with a test implementation? |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
-- |
| 23 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives