Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Svyatogor <svyatogor@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Interest Check: Dynamic config files for portage
Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2003 11:08:03
Message-Id: 20030701144944.0006fcfe.svyatogor@gentoo.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Interest Check: Dynamic config files for portage by Seemant Kulleen
1 On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 02:58:24 -0700
2 Seemant Kulleen <seemant@g.o> wrote:
3
4 > Hi All,
5 >
6 > Before I go and invalidate a bug, I thought I might take the idea around here
7 > to see if it has any merit in terms of usefulness/interest.
8 >
9 > The idea stems from the fact that etc-updating a make.conf file can be a bit
10 > of a stressful event. And as portage's set of features grows, so too will the
11 > size of the make.conf file. I get the impression that the make.conf file is a
12 > little hard to parse, with the huge comment blocks etc etc. So my proposal is
13 > this: a make.conf.d directory which contains files for each section of the
14 > make.conf: use, flags, fetch, packagevars. That way, USE flags can be
15 > explained and specified in use, compiler flags in the flags file, fetch will
16 > contain the fetchcommands, mirrors (both distfiles and rsync), and packagevars
17 > can contain things like ALSA_CARDS for those of us on 2.4 kernels, and
18 > VIDEO_CARDS for those of us who have
19 > xfree/xfree-drm/whatever-future-windowing-system-we-add, and so on. This way,
20 > the actual make.conf file (which tends to be about 10 lines of uncommented
21 > items in the usual case) can be dynamically generated from the information in
22 > those files.
23 >
24
25 Nice idea. Why not? It should make the make.conf easier to manage and easier to
26 update.
27
28 --
29 Sergey Kuleshov <svyatogor@g.o>
30 Let the Force be with us!
31
32 --
33 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list