| 1 |
On 07/09/2017 06:53 AM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sun, 9 Jul 2017 00:42:46 -0700 |
| 3 |
> Daniel Campbell <zlg@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>>> - Sets used in profiles cannot have use expansion, versions or |
| 6 |
>>> anything beyond cat/pkg. |
| 7 |
>> This would break some set behavior, at least in Portage. Specifying a |
| 8 |
>> single version (or better, a slot) in a set is less work than adding |
| 9 |
>> lines to p.mask *and* the set file(s), and p.mask doesn't appear to |
| 10 |
>> support "!=cat/pkg-1.0" syntax to mimic the same functionality |
| 11 |
>> achieved by a versioned atom in a set. It also makes sense to put |
| 12 |
>> packages you want in a set instead of a mask. ">=" or "<=" may be |
| 13 |
>> adequate if you only want one slot or version installed, but the |
| 14 |
>> entire point of slots is to allow multiple versions to be installed |
| 15 |
>> simultaneously. Versioned package names in sets achieve this. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> Valid point, and along those lines to make the rules for sets in |
| 18 |
> profiles easier. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> - Sets in profiles can contain anything that is valid in a |
| 21 |
> profile/packages file, less the * symbol. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> I think that addresses both versions and slots. The rest, like use |
| 24 |
> expansion I believe is handled via package.use in profiles and not in |
| 25 |
> packages. |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Yeah, that could work. As convenient as it is to mix USE flags with |
| 29 |
sets, there's a better place to put it and I'm unsure of any situation |
| 30 |
that would require more than two lines (one in the set, one in p.use) to |
| 31 |
achieve a given USE constraint. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer |
| 35 |
OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net |
| 36 |
fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C 1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6 |
Archives