| 1 |
On Monday 31 March 2008, Marijn Schouten (hkBst) wrote: |
| 2 |
> Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 3 |
> | On Sunday 30 March 2008, Ulrich Mueller wrote: |
| 4 |
> |>>>>>> On Sun, 30 Mar 2008, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 5 |
> |>>> |
| 6 |
> |>>> And IMHO the "emacs" USE flag should not be used here: |
| 7 |
> |>>> |
| 8 |
> |>>> $ ./configure -hs |
| 9 |
> |>>> Configuration of Leafpad 0.8.12: |
| 10 |
> |>>> |
| 11 |
> |>>> Optional Features: |
| 12 |
> |>>> [...] |
| 13 |
> |>>> --enable-emacs implement Emacs key theme (experimental) |
| 14 |
> |>>> |
| 15 |
> |>>> $ equery uses =leafpad-0.8.12 |
| 16 |
> |>>> [...] |
| 17 |
> |>>> + + emacs : Adds support for GNU Emacs |
| 18 |
> |>>> |
| 19 |
> |>>> As its description says, the flag is intended for GNU Emacs support |
| 20 |
> |>>> which is not the case here. |
| 21 |
> |>> |
| 22 |
> |>> i think the USE flag makes sense. perhaps the description should be |
| 23 |
> |>> changed. |
| 24 |
> |> |
| 25 |
> |> Certainly a USE flag makes sense here, but it shouldn't be USE=emacs. |
| 26 |
> |> |
| 27 |
> |> The "emacs" global USE flag is used by 82 other packages (all outside |
| 28 |
> |> the app-emacs category). Its purpose is always that GNU Emacs specific |
| 29 |
> |> files are installed; either directly, or indirectly by pulling another |
| 30 |
> |> package via *DEPEND. |
| 31 |
> | |
| 32 |
> | why cant it mean both ? USE flags are intended to control features, not |
| 33 |
> | dependencies. often times that just happens to translate into |
| 34 |
> | dependencies. realistically though, anyone who wants "emacs" wants all |
| 35 |
> | emacs "things". if it were to just pull in the emacs dependency, then |
| 36 |
> | that could just as easily be accomplished by `emerge emacs` and then we |
| 37 |
> | can drop the USE flag entirely. -mike |
| 38 |
> |
| 39 |
> If this in an emacs thing, then I guess it includes its own |
| 40 |
> emacs-compatible elisp implementation with editor primitives exported to |
| 41 |
> the user? Otherwise customizability is something of a laugh. Keybindings |
| 42 |
> can be rewired. Simply having the same default keybindings as emacs does |
| 43 |
> not make a package emacsy. |
| 44 |
> |
| 45 |
> Seeing as this is an editor and a "GTK+ based simple text editor" I doubt |
| 46 |
> it has much claim to emacs-ness. |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
why does this matter ? if an application includes optional support for |
| 49 |
an "emacs skin" such that it includes emacs bindings/shortcuts/whatever, it |
| 50 |
sounds to me like USE=emacs is appropriate. ive seen random applications |
| 51 |
that have different keybinding modes have the default set, and then optional |
| 52 |
vi or emacs to select from so that things behave as such users would expect. |
| 53 |
-mike |
Archives