| 1 |
On Sunday 19 September 2004 07:43, Duncan wrote: |
| 2 |
> Then, at the top of the file put a big hairy warning about how some |
| 3 |
> package components, particularly in kdebase, are depended on by others, |
| 4 |
> and to disable the use flag and recompile all packages if there are |
| 5 |
> dependency issues, and then leave everything else up to the user. Any |
| 6 |
> bugs on related dependency issues would be marked invalid, see the warning |
| 7 |
> in the file, etc. so it wouldn't become a big support issue. |
| 8 |
As you say, this solution is hairy (or anything else that doesn't create real |
| 9 |
separate ebuilds for the separate apps). I personally don't like it at all |
| 10 |
and don't really want to see it happen even as an alternative to nothing at |
| 11 |
all, because it's so ugly. Of course, it's very easy to implement, but it |
| 12 |
takes away all the advantages of having a proper package manager - all the |
| 13 |
advantages of using portage rather than state-less invocations on the order |
| 14 |
of 'ebuild.sh file.ebuild'... |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
And of course this solution entails more or less not supporting it despite |
| 17 |
having it in the portage tree - marking related bugs as invalid etc. That's |
| 18 |
another reason I don't like it. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Perhaps I don't have the right to say this at this point, having been incative |
| 21 |
for over a year, but this solution simply takes away too much functionality |
| 22 |
and support from the user in order to decrease the maintainer's workload. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
Dan Armak |
| 26 |
Gentoo Linux developer (KDE) |
| 27 |
Matan, Israel |
| 28 |
Public GPG key: http://dev.gentoo.org/~danarmak/danarmak-gpg-public.key |
| 29 |
Fingerprint: DD70 DBF9 E3D4 6CB9 2FDD 0069 508D 9143 8D5F 8951 |
Archives