| 1 |
Hi, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
At Sun, 25 Jul 2004 19:40:21 -0700, |
| 4 |
Erik Swanson wrote: |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
> On Jul 25, 2004, at 7:15 PM, Lina Pezzella wrote: |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> > Two topics: |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > 1) possibility of creating a 'carbon' use flag |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Just a thought, but wouldn't 'carbon' be overly specific and later |
| 13 |
> necessitate the creation of a 'cocoa' use flag? |
| 14 |
> My understanding is that naming use flags after specific libraries is |
| 15 |
> only to facilitate toggling of the dependency on said library, which is |
| 16 |
> invalid for this particular flag because all macos systems have both |
| 17 |
> the carbon and cocoa libraries present. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
I don't think so. Having a library doesn't mean you want to enable |
| 20 |
support for the library. For example, you might have both GTK+2 and |
| 21 |
GTK+1 (for whatever dependency) and don't want to enable GTK+1. |
| 22 |
Another example is ncurses USE flag. ncurses is in system profile |
| 23 |
so all Gentoo systems have ncurses, but you may or may not want |
| 24 |
enable ncurses support for your system. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
> Perhaps a either a more generic name along the lines of 'osxgui' or a |
| 27 |
> more specific name like 'cocoabindings' should be considered, depending |
| 28 |
> on what you intend the flag to actually do. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
One thing I had in mind was enabling carbon interface for emacs. It |
| 31 |
is just like we enable Xaw3d interface, GTK+2 inteface, or motif |
| 32 |
interface with Xaw3d, gtk and motif USE flags, respectively (so I |
| 33 |
didn't see any problem creating carbon USE flag). FYI, this was |
| 34 |
discussed two weeks ago in gentoo-osx list (as a local USE flag at |
| 35 |
that time). |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
-- |
| 38 |
Mamoru KOMACHI <usata@g.o> |
Archives