| 1 |
On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 2:32 PM Ian Stakenvicius <axs@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> I don't think the process needs to be simplified much more than this; |
| 4 |
> each layer above has its purpose. However I do very much want to |
| 5 |
> caution on making it more complicated, especially with the addition of |
| 6 |
> syntax that allows setting or ignoring useflag state changes in a way |
| 7 |
> that will jumble up these layers. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
I think as long as it is a heirarchy it will be straightforward enough. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
If we introduce a ^ operator that unsets a flag, the only question is |
| 13 |
how far that propagates down the layers, and into what kinds of |
| 14 |
layers: |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Does a profile ^flag undo an IUSE +flag? |
| 17 |
Does a make.conf ^flag undo a profile +flag? An IUSE +flag? A |
| 18 |
profile flag mask? |
| 19 |
Does a package.use ^flag undo a make.conf +flag? A profile +flag, an |
| 20 |
IUSE +flag? Etc... |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
This matters more than with +/-, since these just bluntly set the flag |
| 23 |
to one setting or the other regardless of what happened below (I think |
| 24 |
- I'd have to check all the different possibilities even for that). |
| 25 |
When you're just unsetting things the question is how many of these |
| 26 |
flags do you unset going down how far? Obviously if you unset |
| 27 |
everything up to that point then it is no different from -flag as we |
| 28 |
default to off on everything. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
Rich |
Archives