[gentoo-dev] Re: USE flag documentation

[Ryan Hill]

Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> Ryan Hill wrote:
>> What do people think of this?
>>
>> a) Keep use.desc as it is:  a list of common flags and a short general
>> description of their meaning.
>
> Good.
>
>> b) Keep use.local.desc as it is: a list of per-package flags that are
>> specific to one to a few ebuilds (i think 5 is the number though i
>> think 10 is more appropriate, but that's not relevant to this
>> discussion).  Again, each has a short description.
>>
>> c) Allow flags from use.desc to also exist in use.local.desc.  In the
>> case that a flag for a package exists in both, the use.local.desc
>> description overrides the use.desc one.  This allows a more specific
>> per-package description of global flags.
>
> Good.
>
>> d) Allow long descriptions in a package's metadata.xml, as some have
>> begun to do already, for cases where more info is needed.  For example
>> I'd like to explain exactly what the bindist flag on freetype does and
>> what legal implications disabling it can have.
>
> Right. Also why not also add short descriptions there, and deprecate
> use.local.desc when tools are converted? Placing package-local info to
> global files (when not needed to distinguish profiles as with
> package.use.mask etc) is icky.
> Note that the metadata.xml should be able to record per-version
> differences somehow.

Then instead of grepping a file I would need to read XML.  Also icky.  Utils 
would help, but then utils would need to implement an XML parser.


-- 
fonts,                                            by design, by neglect
gcc-porting,                              for a fact or just for effect
wxwindows @ gentoo     EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662

-- 
gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list