Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò" <flameeyes@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] inetd/xinetd useflags
Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2005 14:37:35
Message-Id: 200507061632.35032@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] inetd/xinetd useflags by Mike Frysinger
1 On Wednesday 06 July 2005 16:17, Mike Frysinger wrote:
2 > the hasq part is pointless and the insinto is bad form for a do* func
3 It's not pointless, ignoring it will make us come back to the old problem of
4 dopamd/newpamd functions which couldn't be used on non-optional-pam-dependant
5 packages because if someone had -pam in useflags the file wasn't installed,
6 also if pam wasn't optional (and so pam was not in IUSE).
7
8 For the insinto, yeah you're right.
9
10 --
11 Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò
12 Gentoo Developer - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/
13 (Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, Gentoo/AMD64, Sound, PAM)

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] inetd/xinetd useflags Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o>