| 1 |
On Wed, 2004-01-21 at 12:08, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wednesday 21 January 2004 06:02, Jeremy Huddleston wrote: |
| 3 |
> > 1. What's the policy for adding new USE flags to gentoo? I recently |
| 4 |
> > came across this myself when putting together an updated ebuild for |
| 5 |
> > squirrelmail which added anti-virus and gpg plugin options. There's no |
| 6 |
> > 'gpg' USE flag... ssl is "close" but doesn't quite fit... also there is |
| 7 |
> > 'clamav' for using clamav or 'oav' for using openantivirus.org, but |
| 8 |
> > neither really fit for this package... |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
crypt is usually used for gpg, but it's description actually states |
| 11 |
that. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> local use flags it's up to each developer to be good about it ... in your |
| 14 |
> case, crypt might fit what you want, might not ... |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
afaicr local USE flags also should be announced on -dev, although need |
| 17 |
no discussion. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
One should still be careful about adding USE flags, local USE flags are |
| 20 |
no reason to get sloppy about it and just add as it pleases. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
In my opinion the USE flag system can use a bit of a redefinition. |
| 23 |
Categories in the sense of directly related (gtk/qt) and function |
| 24 |
describing (crypt/printing) flags should be made and maybe seperated in |
| 25 |
ebuilds. They have different purposes but have a lot of similarities. I |
| 26 |
think the current amount of USE flags is confusing and the lack of a |
| 27 |
distinction between the several types of flags isn't helping. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
- foser |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives