| 1 |
Josh Glover wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
>Quoth Jason Rhinelander: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
>>Ignoring ufed for the moment, this brings up an interesting idea - is |
| 8 |
>>there any reason portage couldn't dynamically manage the |
| 9 |
>>/etc/portage/package.use file, so that: |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>>USE="foo -bar" emerge somepackage |
| 12 |
>> |
| 13 |
>>would add |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
>>cat-name/somepackage foo -bar |
| 16 |
>> |
| 17 |
>>to package.use? That means a user could update packages and have them |
| 18 |
>>installed the same way (unless, of course, I decided to specify a |
| 19 |
>>differense USE= or changed package.mask). |
| 20 |
>> |
| 21 |
>> |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
>This is a great idea, IMO. The only thing that I would add is that we would |
| 24 |
>need a new command-line switch to emerge, something like --save-use. This way, |
| 25 |
>the default behaviour of emerge would not change, and people relying on it |
| 26 |
>would not get stung. People like me who would use the feature would just be |
| 27 |
>required to use the new switch. |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
Yes, it would be realy nice to have --save-use fore example, but also to |
| 32 |
be able to se all relevant USE-flags for a specific package in ufed and |
| 33 |
there current status. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
/D |
Archives