| 1 |
On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 02:34:43AM -0500, in |
| 2 |
<401A0913.8080108@g.o>, John Davis <zhen@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> Drake Wyrm wrote: |
| 4 |
> >On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 02:05:57AM -0500, in |
| 5 |
> ><401A0255.9010600@g.o>, John Davis <zhen@g.o> wrote: |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> >>Drake Wyrm wrote: |
| 8 |
> >> |
| 9 |
> >>>Just had an idea for a new USE flag. As a companion to the 'doc' USE flag |
| 10 |
> >>>(which installs extra documentation), how about a USE flag which inhibits |
| 11 |
> >>>/any/ documentation. This would be highly handy for trimming down a |
| 12 |
> >>>system |
| 13 |
> >>>such as a server or router which will never have a warm body sitting in |
| 14 |
> >>>front of it after everything is installed and configured. What say ye? |
| 15 |
> >>Why not put -doc in USE? If the ebuild is specifying docs to install |
| 16 |
> >>using the doc USE, doing the above will negate that effect. All that |
| 17 |
> >>needs to be done is make more ebuilds conform to it. |
| 18 |
> >Because nearly every ebuild, even those which USE doc, installs the |
| 19 |
> >normal documentation (e.g. manpages, texinfo, </usr/share/doc/${PVR}/*>) |
| 20 |
> >even with USE=-doc. USE=doc results in *extra* goodies. |
| 21 |
> Then the flag is ambiguous - does it mean all docs or just "special" |
| 22 |
> docs? I say the best way to go is to just make more ebuilds conform, |
| 23 |
> perhaps add more documentation about the doc flag to the portage guide. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
What's ambiguous about it? |
| 26 |
doc - Adds extra documentation (API, Javadoc, etc) |
| 27 |
-- use.desc |
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
Batou: Hey, Major... You ever hear of "human rights"? |
| 30 |
Kusanagi: I understand the concept, but I've never seen it in action. |
| 31 |
--Ghost in the Shell |
Archives