| 1 |
On 2016-06-01 11:19 AM, NP-Hardass wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 06/01/2016 10:29 AM, Mart Raudsepp wrote: |
| 3 |
>> Hello, |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>> So here's something more simple wrt GUI USE flags. |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>> Global USE=gui for |
| 8 |
>> gui - enable an optional graphics user interface or extra GUI tool |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> Essentially, if it's an optional GUI, it'd be behind a USE=gui, instead |
| 11 |
>> of USE=gtk, USE=X, USE=qt4 or USE=qt5, when that optional GUI is |
| 12 |
>> available in only one toolkit version. So hence feature based flag, not |
| 13 |
>> dependency-based. |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
> I know that it was previously mentioned that there was discussion about |
| 16 |
> this long ago, but I'm not familiar with those discussions. Is someone |
| 17 |
> more familiar with those discussions able to bring up the talking points? |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> One issue that springs to mind though is, let's say a pkg supports only |
| 20 |
> qt4 for a gui, you'd have the gui flag. Upstream adds qt5 support. Do |
| 21 |
> you keep the gui flag and make qt4 and qt5 dependent on it, or do you |
| 22 |
> remove the gui flag? |
| 23 |
The way I understand it, the 'gui' flag guarantees a GUI to be built, |
| 24 |
not which one. I assume it would default to upstream recommendation or |
| 25 |
the gentoo dev's judgement. |
| 26 |
> I feel like the latter might lead to confusion, |
| 27 |
> while the former suggests that the flag should be used more generally |
| 28 |
> than just one toolkit/version being available. |
| 29 |
>> Mart |
| 30 |
>> |
Archives