1 |
Lares Moreau wrote: |
2 |
|
3 |
>On Mon, 2005-12-26 at 12:36 -0600, Joe McCann wrote: |
4 |
> |
5 |
> |
6 |
>>For the record, the eds flag was |
7 |
>>added as a default flag because every 3rd gnome user would file bugs or |
8 |
>>complain via forums because they installed gnome, found no |
9 |
>>evolution-data-server integration, and then be bummed when they had to |
10 |
>>recompile packages again. This whole thread seems to have come from a |
11 |
>>misunderstanding of how use.defaults work and 20 min of boredom. |
12 |
>> |
13 |
>> |
14 |
>I'm relatively ignorant of USE Flag intricacies, so please forgive me if |
15 |
>things don't 'fit'. |
16 |
> |
17 |
>Is it feasible and or useful to have a 'meta-flag' that that enables all |
18 |
>the 'necessary' USE flags for a given group of packages? So something |
19 |
>like USE='meta-<flagname>'. |
20 |
>This has the distinction of being a meta-flag, and as such nothing |
21 |
>really gets turned on 'behind the users back', advanced users can look |
22 |
>into it and see what is being enabled by it and USE='-flag' for the |
23 |
>flags the users doesn't need/want, and expert users would just not use |
24 |
>it. This way meta packages like KDE and Gnome can have their own |
25 |
>meta-flag to do what the need with. |
26 |
> |
27 |
>It also seems to me that more things will need to 'just work' as our |
28 |
>user-base becomes larger and, on average, less advanced. We could amend |
29 |
>the desktop guide to include something like USE='meta-gnome' to the |
30 |
>gnome section. And similar to other meta-flags. |
31 |
> |
32 |
>This may add an unnecessary level of complexity to the use flag system, |
33 |
>but also may be very useful. |
34 |
> |
35 |
> |
36 |
|
37 |
If I remember right theres a GLEP (#29) that purposes to do something |
38 |
very similar (USE Groups I think it was called), but I believe its |
39 |
withdrawn. |
40 |
|
41 |
Regards, |
42 |
Andrew |
43 |
Tux |
44 |
-- |
45 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |