Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Vaeth <vaeth@××××××××××××××××××××××××.de>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New RESTRICT=live value for identification of live ebuilds?
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2008 14:55:20
1 > > USE=live could perfectly make sense, if it is equipped with
2 > > the obvious meaning:
3 >
4 > Well, it seems to me that you're trying to shoehorn a USE flag into
5 > a role that's intended to be filled by package sets.
7 Maybe there is a misunderstanding: I am mainly suggesting the "live"
8 USE flag to allow the user to decide in a uniform manner (and on a
9 per-package basis) whether new sources shell be fetched regularly
10 before the rebuild (that's why I said that my suggestion is
11 slightly OT).
13 There is no way to do this by package sets.
15 But *if* a "live" USE flag would be uniformly used for that purpose,
16 it would have also the "side effect" that you can read from IUSE
17 whether it is a live package, i.e. there is no need to put this
18 information additionally into the RESTRICT variable.
20 > The idea is
21 > that instead of settings USE flags in package.use, you'd define a
22 > package set containing the specific packages that you want rebuilt.
24 I guess this is part of the misunderstanding:
25 I do not care so much whether @emerge-ebuild would select all packages
26 with "live" in its IUSE or only those for which the "live" flag is
27 actually set (from your reply I understand that you would consider
28 the latter as an inappropriate use; I do not protest. Anyway, even the
29 *possibility* to do this even if it is not implemented - might be
30 considered as an additional feature of USE over RESTRICT).
31 However to repeat:
32 The main point in introducing the "live" USE flag should be IMHO to
33 let the user decide whether the sources should be fetched. The fact
34 that IUSE then marks live ebuilds in the way which you wanted is an
35 additional side effect.
37 Regards
38 Martin