| 1 |
Ignoring ufed for the moment, this brings up an interesting idea - is |
| 2 |
there any reason portage couldn't dynamically manage the |
| 3 |
/etc/portage/package.use file, so that: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
USE="foo -bar" emerge somepackage |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
would add |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
cat-name/somepackage foo -bar |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
to package.use? That means a user could update packages and have them |
| 12 |
installed the same way (unless, of course, I decided to specify a |
| 13 |
differense USE= or changed package.mask). |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Thoughts? |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
-- Jason Rhinelander |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Daniel Wirengren wrote: |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> One solution could be to extend ufed with a argument of a package. |
| 23 |
> Ufed then only shows the relevant USE-flags and lets the user set them. |
| 24 |
> Then ufed changes the /etc/portage/package.use accordingly. |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives