| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Vlastimil Babka wrote: |
| 5 |
> Zac Medico wrote: |
| 6 |
>> If the package manager exposes a slightly lower level interface to |
| 7 |
>> the USE flags then build_with_use can use that instead, and the |
| 8 |
>> package manager won't have to implement the full build_with_use |
| 9 |
>> interface. For example, portageq currently supports a "metadata" |
| 10 |
>> command that can be used to query installed package metadata such as |
| 11 |
>> USE and IUSE. Perhaps we should use some type of interface similar |
| 12 |
>> to that. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> I'd say it depends on whether we want to support native_built_with_use |
| 15 |
> just as a temporary workaround until there are use deps (then just |
| 16 |
> package managers not using vdb would implement it, and portage need not |
| 17 |
> care), or we would want to use the general metadata query also for other |
| 18 |
> purposes. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
The point is that if we simplify the interface and avoid duplication |
| 21 |
of logic, there will be less potential for EAPI change. If somebody |
| 22 |
wants to add a new option to built_with_use then they'll either have |
| 23 |
to bump the EAPI or just accept that anybody using an incompatible |
| 24 |
native_built_with_use implementation may experience api breakage. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Zac |
| 27 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 28 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux) |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
iD8DBQFHqWaf/ejvha5XGaMRAgMPAKDhVfdAcdC/m+ZCiIPUGKkeSzAZuACgr+6Y |
| 31 |
dgxIgIeV8FhsDHPxLI9egEc= |
| 32 |
=W8Pg |
| 33 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives