| 1 |
Petteri Räty wrote: |
| 2 |
> Alin Năstac kirjoitti: |
| 3 |
>> Petteri Räty wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> Benedikt Morbach kirjoitti: |
| 5 |
>>>> |
| 6 |
>>>> In my humble opinion it would be nice to have a greater degree of |
| 7 |
>>>> control by separating this into two useflags, sqlite2 and sqlite3, |
| 8 |
>>>> just like e.g. qt3 and qt4 |
| 9 |
>>>> |
| 10 |
>>> |
| 11 |
>>> Probably. Even better would be to get rid of sqlite2 but that |
| 12 |
>>> probably doesn't happen any time soon. |
| 13 |
>> |
| 14 |
>> I understood this will be the case, so I removed sqlite2 support from |
| 15 |
>> mail-filter/dspam even though it could support both versions. |
| 16 |
>> |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> If a program supports both then go with sqlite3. The things is that |
| 19 |
> there are sqlite2 only things left. I don't have much interest in |
| 20 |
> sqlite2. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
If a program supports only sqlite2, shouldn't "sqlite? ( |
| 24 |
=dev-db/sqlite-2* )" be used as dependency atom? |
Archives