Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o, Francesco Riosa <vivo75@×××××.com>, Mike Gilbert <floppym@g.o>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] use.desc: Improve description of USE=test
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 23:45:13
Message-Id: 670d034e-c081-46f9-8948-de12d44b50f0@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] use.desc: Improve description of USE=test by Francesco Riosa
1 On 08/24/2018 04:14 PM, Francesco Riosa wrote:
2 >
3 > Il 24/08/18 19:08, Mike Gilbert ha scritto:
4 >> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 10:45 AM Kent Fredric <kentnl@g.o> wrote:
5 >>> On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 10:27:01 -0400
6 >>> Mike Gilbert <floppym@g.o> wrote:
7 >>>
8 >>>> If you want to define behavior that can be relied upon in ebuilds, it
9 >>>> should be specified in PMS. PMS does not define any meaning for the
10 >>>> "test" USE flag.
11 >>> We should eschew idealism about how the world *should* behave, and avoid
12 >>> making portage a steaming garbage heap in order to comply with a
13 >>> terrible PMS specification of a heavily used feature.
14 >> Portage still works just fine for most people who would enable
15 >> FEATURES=test. Stop exaggerating.
16 >>
17 > People enabling FEATURES=test on most but not all packages had some
18 > troubles and they need to disable them in both package.{env,use}
19 > I'd like to have a flag to reinstate the previous portage behaviour, but
20 > that's probably too late
21
22 Would a FEATURES setting that implies RESTRICT="!test? ( test )" for all
23 ebuilds do what you want?
24 --
25 Thanks,
26 Zac

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] use.desc: Improve description of USE=test Francesco Riosa <vivo75@×××××.com>