| 1 |
On Mon, 2005-09-19 at 07:28 -0500, Brian Harring wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sun, Sep 18, 2005 at 03:48:43PM +0000, John N. Laliberte wrote: |
| 3 |
> > * "but you are taking away choice!" - If a program has both GTK2 and GTK3 |
| 4 |
> > interfaces, there are many ways to allow for testing of the experimental |
| 5 |
> > interface. For instance, package.mask with a revision number. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> package.mask isn't a perfect fit from where I sit; if it's already merged |
| 8 |
> (say for development), but the developer has masked gtk-3, all pkgs |
| 9 |
> that prefer gtk-3 will continue linking against it till gtk-3 is |
| 10 |
> unmerged regardless of the masking. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
For an example to illustrate what John meant by using package.mask, |
| 14 |
assuming gtk-3 is masked, and we have an appfoo with a default gtk-2 |
| 15 |
interface and an experimental gtk-3 interface. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
The un-package.masked ebuilds will always build against gtk-2, as that'd |
| 18 |
be the designated interface by the developer. By always build against, I |
| 19 |
mean gtk-2 would be the default interface - so it'd specify |
| 20 |
--enable-gtk2/--disable-gtk3 or explicitly not use automagic to detect |
| 21 |
gtk-3 and always use gtk-2. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
We could have a package.mask'ed appfoo-rX ebuild that builds with the |
| 24 |
gtk-3 interface as it becomes more mature. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
This is sort of an extension of "developer knows best" when choosing |
| 27 |
which gtk+ interface to make the default. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Mike Gardiner |
| 30 |
(Obz) |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives