Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Global USE=gui

[Damien Levac]

On 2016-06-01 10:13 PM, waltdnes@××××××××.org wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 07:56:41PM +0200, Micha?? Górny wrote
>
>> waltdnes@××××××××.org wrote:
>>
>>>    I see this as at least a redundancy, if not a problem.  First, let's
>>> look at the general case.  An optional "UI" (User Interface) is also
>>> selected...
>>> * via the "tools" useflag 78 times in use.local.desc
>>> * via the "ncurses" useflag 10 times in use.local.desc.
>>> * for a lot of ebuilds via the "ncurses" useflag in use.desc (So why
>>>    does "ncurses" show up in use.local.desc ???)
>>>
>>>   There is no need for an additional "TUI" (Text User Interface) use flag
>>> for these cases.  "tools" and/or "ncurses" tells you enough.  Similarly,
>>> "GUI" is grab-bag of gtk2/gtk3/qt4/qt5/X/Wayland/whatever.  The only
>>> thing they have in common is a hard-coded dependancy on graphics libs.
>>> "GUI" is an implicit dependancy of gtk2/gtk3/qt4/qt5/X/Wayland/whatever.
>>> Using any of them tells you enough.  What do we accomplish by requiring
>>> one more USE flag?  This will also make dependancy resolution of ebuilds
>>> more complex, i.e. slower.  Why?
>> Simple regular users don't want to be concerned with choice of toolkit
>> for every single package, as long as a GUI is provided.
>    Then put one of X/xorg/wayland/mir/qt4/qt5/gtk2/gtk3/fltk into USE in
> make.conf.  This will *FORCE* a gui where applicable.
>
>> Furthermore, this matches the recommended USE flag design where the
>> more important flags are provided as feature flags, while specific
>> dependency choice flags are minor.
>    This is going to require *THREE* levels of flags, with the first one
> being totally unnecessary...
>
> Level 1) GUI
>
> Level 2) X or xorg or Wayland or Mir
>
> Level 3) qt4 or qt5 or gtk2 or gtk3 or fltk
>    Let me re-phrase my question... is there *ANY* set of circumstances
> under which any of X/xorg/wayland/mir/qt4/qt5/gtk2/gtk3/fltk USE flag
> can be set for a package *WITHOUT* requiring a gui?  I can see any of X
> or xorg or Wayland or Mir being a requirement for any of
> qt4/qt5/gtk2/gtk3/fltk.  But any of the Level 2 or Level 3 flags *FORCES*
> a GUI of one sort or another.
IMHO, you see this in reverse. the 'gui' useflag would be useful for 
users who don't want to care about X/wayland/mir and do not want to care 
about gtk/qt, they just want windows to be drawn for the applications 
they install -- without, if possible, pulling useless dependencies.
>
>    I repeat, requiring a "GUI" use flag for GUI apps makes as much sense
> as requiring a "TUI" flag for commandline apps.  I hope I'm not giving
> people ideas the wrong way.  No I don't want a "TUI" flag either.
>