[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-core] crap use flags in the profiles

[Brian Harring]

Note, sending to dev only, not cc'ing core; the inital -core post was 
to make sure those who aren't watching dev ml see the email (annoying, 
but it's an old habit I've yet to kick despite needing to).

On Sat, Aug 27, 2005 at 04:48:26AM -0500, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Brian Harring wrote:
> >I don't recall having kde/gtk crap turned on by default when I first
> >showed up.  Maybe I'm missing something; regardless, the defaults
> >(which should be minimal from my standpoint) are anything but.
>
> I think you recall wrong, then. The default USE flags have been set so
> that the majority of systems will work properly without modifications,
> not so that they're the minimal set.
Already stated that it's entirely possible my memory is whacked, that 
said my point still stands.

> The purpose of being able to negate USE flags in lower cascaded profiles
> is pointless if each level is the minimum. I think it makes more sense
> to have each level be a reasonable default that most people would
> prefer, then have weird exceptions subtract it.

Note I'm not advocating every level of the profile be bare minimal, 
with the end nodes having tons jammed into it; I'm advocating exactly 
what you're stating.  Chunk the sucker up, shifting stuff around just 
the same as you would if you were designing base classes to be 
inherited.

The thing to note is that if you're relying on negation, it's going to 
bite you in the ass without efforts.  A server subprofile pulling from 
a parent that holds desktop cruft will be forced to either
A) reinvent the wheel (maintain their own USE list), as a sizable 
   chunk of users do via -* usage
B) or very carefully watch people screwing around with the parent, 
   tagging in a new desktop USE var, and adding the matching negation.

What I'm advocating is that the '05 profile (fex) tag in the defaults 
for that profile release, desktop/server agnostic, *system* 
defaults, eg toolchain, pam, nptl, etc.  The subprofile the user 
chooses (the desktop or server target) building upon those base 
settngs.

Multiple inherits for profiles is the main reason I'm not pushing on 
this; shifting desktop cruft out of the bases (my definition of base 
mind you) requires pulling from (fex) x86/2005.1 + desktop/2005.1 .

My 2 cents at least.
~harring