| 1 |
Ühel kenal päeval, R, 27.01.2017 kell 11:22, kirjutas Mike Gilbert: |
| 2 |
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 2:54 AM, Mart Raudsepp <leio@g.o> |
| 3 |
> wrote: |
| 4 |
> > Then there is no need to think about what is enabled globally or |
| 5 |
> > not. |
| 6 |
> > Point being, use REQUIRED_USE sparingly, and rarely a good idea to |
| 7 |
> > block things with common global USE flags, or demand a local USE |
| 8 |
> > flag |
| 9 |
> > based on a default enabled global USE flag without locally USE |
| 10 |
> > defaulting that global flag too - and other such cases. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> I didn't really mean for this to turn into a thread about the merits |
| 13 |
> of REQUIRED_USE; in hindsight I should have left out that first |
| 14 |
> sentence. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> Regardless of the REQUIRED_USE discussion, I don't think it makes |
| 17 |
> sense to have berkdb and gdbm in USE in make.defaults. I would like |
| 18 |
> to |
| 19 |
> move them to IUSE defaults or package.use if necessary. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
That sounds great to me when done with proper care as an interim |
| 22 |
solution. |
| 23 |
If they aren't both global enabled, the concerns about REQUIRED_USE |
| 24 |
here are lessened. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Mart |
Archives