Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] USE_EXPAND_HIDDEN: why make.globals?
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2006 23:36:39
Message-Id: 44AD9C6B.5030704@gentoo.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] USE_EXPAND_HIDDEN: why make.globals? by Ciaran McCreesh
1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
2 Hash: SHA1
3
4 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
5 > Is there any particular reason USE_EXPAND_HIDDEN needs to be in
6 > make.globals, as opposed to in base/make.defaults alongside USE_EXPAND?
7 > Seems to me it'd make more sense were the two kept together...
8
9 Given the support that's currently available in portage, that seems like a good move to my. However, I've been thinking about proposing the addition of support for things like $PORTDIR/profiles/{make.defaults,bashrc,package.use} as part of a "repo level" profile. These would be a logical extension of the support that already exists for $PORTDIR/profiles/package.mask. But anyway, base/make.defaults makes sense for now.
10
11 Zac
12
13 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
14 Version: GnuPG v1.4.4 (GNU/Linux)
15
16 iD8DBQFErZxp/ejvha5XGaMRAvw4AKCiNolBORuKxOhptk6THRqG8PrmkwCgwCVt
17 hjybF1i7x/ymSkKx7QbxyEg=
18 =kziC
19 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
20 --
21 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] USE_EXPAND_HIDDEN: why make.globals? Stephen Bennett <spb@g.o>