1 |
On 18:45 Tue 15 Jan , Alec Warner wrote: |
2 |
> On 1/15/08, Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
> > On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 17:00 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote: |
4 |
> > > My expectation is that `grep "flag" use.local.desc` will give me a |
5 |
> > > list of packages using that flag (or having it in the description), |
6 |
> > > one per line. Putting paragraphs in there doesn't seem right. |
7 |
> > |
8 |
> > A single long line still fills this "requirement" for us. However, it |
9 |
> > does bring up the point. Why even have use.local.desc (or |
10 |
> > metadata.xml's <use> tag) at all? Is there really a need for a *global* |
11 |
> > list of flags that are ebuild-specific? (I don't care or have much |
12 |
> > opinion, either way, I'm merely presenting some topic for discussion on |
13 |
> > this.) |
14 |
> |
15 |
> The global use.* files are convenient because it means we don't need |
16 |
> to generate or push a cache for the data (like for metadata). If it |
17 |
> was per package or per-ebuild we would need to generate a cache to |
18 |
> answer queries like 'what does the "foo" flag do'. |
19 |
|
20 |
Since Chris only mentioned use.local.desc, I'm assuming he only meant |
21 |
local flags rather than use.desc also. In that case, asking what the |
22 |
"foo" local flag does doesn't make sense, because it does something |
23 |
different depending on the package you're curious about. Centralizing |
24 |
what feels like inherently local data seems odd to me. USE flag editors |
25 |
would still need to generate a complete list, though, so this would make |
26 |
more work for them. |
27 |
|
28 |
Chris, I'm not entirely clear what you meant by your suggestion of also |
29 |
dropping metadata.xml <use>; where would we describe local flags? |
30 |
|
31 |
Thanks, |
32 |
Donnie |
33 |
-- |
34 |
gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list |