| 1 |
Michał Górny schrieb: |
| 2 |
>> |
| 3 |
>>> 2. Packages use REQUIRED_USE to force an appropriate choice. |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>> That would be a policy violation. Packages should pick a reasonable |
| 6 |
>> default if flags are conflicting, but not force users to micro-manage |
| 7 |
>> their flags. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Who did establish that *idiotic* policy and why is he still |
| 10 |
> a developer? The whole *point of USE Flags* is to let people |
| 11 |
> micro-manage stuff. Picking up a random default makes flags |
| 12 |
> meaningless, confusing and makes it impossible to establish |
| 13 |
> appropriate USE dependencies. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
I assume "micro-manage" means users maintaining extensive lists of |
| 16 |
per-package flags in package.use, which I agree with ulm is to be avoided. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Setting the USE flags once in make.conf would not qualify as micro-managing |
| 19 |
in my opinion. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
There is an exception though, in cases where this breaks reverse USE |
| 22 |
dependencies, it may be allowed and necessary to use REQUIRED_USE[0]. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Best regards, |
| 26 |
Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
[0] |
| 29 |
https://devmanual.gentoo.org/general-concepts/use-flags/index.html#conflicting-use-flags |
Archives