| 1 |
On 11/18/2014 12:05 AM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: |
| 2 |
> USE="-*" was maybe a reasonable idea before we had use defaults. |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> Now, by setting USE="-*", you deviate from upstream defaults at random places |
| 5 |
> and pointlessly mess up the dependency calculations of python / ruby / |
| 6 |
> multilib / ... packages. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Those necessary USE expands are set of course. And the python USE deps |
| 10 |
and USE flag deps are pretty much correct, so there is no surprise on |
| 11 |
that front. You get tons of correct warnings about unmet stuff and it's |
| 12 |
quite trivial to fix these. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
I didn't know that gentoo is about "defaults". If anything... that's |
| 15 |
what most gentoo users don't care about in my experience. They want |
| 16 |
control and correct dependencies without random assumptions. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
I'm not really sure if we still disagree, except that you think it's |
| 19 |
"dangerous". Sure it is, especially when ebuild deps are wrong. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
That said... if disabling a USE flag breaks 300+ packages, then there |
| 22 |
are a few possibilities: |
| 23 |
* fix all deps in those 300+ packages (seems like a waste of time here, |
| 24 |
but is still correct) |
| 25 |
* make it difficult to disable the USE flag and spit lots of warnings |
| 26 |
(which is rather a hack) |
| 27 |
* remove the flag (maybe provide unsupported hackery in the toolchain |
| 28 |
overlay) |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
I personally don't have a strong opinion on any of those solutions. But |
| 31 |
I'm quite tired of people telling me how to use gentoo and what to |
| 32 |
expect about correctness of dependencies. |
Archives