| 1 |
On Sun, 2003-09-07 at 02:57, Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sat, 2003-09-06 at 20:26, Steven Elling wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Does portage bomb out if make.conf is not present? If so, maybe portage |
| 4 |
> > needs to be changed so that it will work without the file. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> I definitely like the idea of creating make.conf docs and a link from |
| 7 |
> the install docs. Also, why can't the portage ebuild contain a 0 byte |
| 8 |
> make.conf file? After all, the file CAN be empty and portage will still |
| 9 |
> work from the make.globals since make.conf serves no purpose but to |
| 10 |
> override the system defaults. We could include a make.conf file in the |
| 11 |
> stage tarballs with a few settings (depending on the settings of the |
| 12 |
> stage) and a comment telling the user where the docs for make.conf are |
| 13 |
> located both locally and on Gentoo.org. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
I really do not see how having to either: |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
1) Copy and paste everything |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
2) Type if from a printout/whatever |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
is efficient or helps the average user? It is way easier |
| 22 |
to just uncomment and change as needed with the help, etc |
| 23 |
there in front of you. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
What happened to CONFIG_PROTECT and you having control? |
| 26 |
Just mv the thing to make.conf.orig and edit a clean |
| 27 |
file, or if you really want it to stay the same to see |
| 28 |
what additions there is in future, leave as is, and |
| 29 |
just put a 'source /etc/make.conf.foo' in there, and |
| 30 |
add your changes to /etc/make.conf.foo. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Come on guys, think what is best for the *distro* (meaning, |
| 33 |
what will work best for the other 90% of users, and not |
| 34 |
necessary for you ...). |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
Thanks, |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
-- |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
Martin Schlemmer |
| 42 |
Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop/System Team Developer |
| 43 |
Cape Town, South Africa |
Archives