Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: l10n.eclass
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 19:15:41
Message-Id: 20120720201357.2f973a4f@googlemail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: l10n.eclass by Ian Stakenvicius
1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
2 Hash: SHA1
3
4 On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 15:05:35 -0400
5 Ian Stakenvicius <axs@g.o> wrote:
6 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
7 > Hash: SHA256
8 > On 20/07/12 01:54 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
9 > > On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:43:15 -0400 Alexandre Rostovtsev
10 > > <tetromino@g.o> wrote:
11 > >>> If you dep upon foo[linguas_en(+)] and linguas_en isn't in
12 > >>> IUSE, what happens?
13 > >>
14 > >> Fatal error. If a package installs its translations implicitly
15 > >> via gettext's rules depending on the value of LINGUAS at
16 > >> configure time, then obviously other packages must rely on that
17 > >> package having installed any particular translation.
18 > >
19 > > Uh, the entire point of the (+) is that it's *not* a fatal error if
20 > > you have a default.
21 >
22 > If this doesn't work (assuming foo provides whatever this package
23 > needs it to have for linguas_en), then the dep is wrong in the first
24 > place and either (+) shouldn't be set or the use-dep on foo shouldn't
25 > exist to begin with.
26
27 ...but (+) exists precisely because developers wanted a way of not
28 having fatal errors when using use dependencies. Non-defaulted use
29 dependencies are supposed to give errors if there's no match in
30 IUSE_EFFECTIVE, but unfortunately Portage chose not to make it as
31 strict as the Council-approved wording required.
32
33 - --
34 Ciaran McCreesh
35 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
36 Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
37
38 iEYEARECAAYFAlAJrfgACgkQ96zL6DUtXhGjGACfdsaHwmKKq13EtlS9Jna0ueSj
39 vc4An3xifK/Y2V2SwPc2k19kYmLlHZUk
40 =eIrd
41 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: l10n.eclass Ian Stakenvicius <axs@g.o>