1 |
Hi, |
2 |
|
3 |
I'd like to get some insight how others see the concept of narrowing the |
4 |
scope of USE flags in Gentoo. |
5 |
|
6 |
Taking a quote from devmanual: |
7 |
|
8 |
> USE flags are to control optional dependencies and settings which |
9 |
the user may reasonably want to select. |
10 |
|
11 |
I'd like to focus on the 'reasonably want' here. While it is commonly |
12 |
agreed on that we interface as USE flags only things that make sense to |
13 |
be togglable, it is not always the case. It is not uncommon to see |
14 |
packages that puts every possible option as USE flag which hardly |
15 |
benefit anyone in some cases. |
16 |
|
17 |
It creates artificial choice of USE flag that makes as much sense as |
18 |
building and trying to use solar-powered night vision googles. Possible |
19 |
to be engineered, but makes absolute no sense to exist, yet, there will |
20 |
be someone who will go with it and then things will not work in desired |
21 |
way, bugs will be reported, effort will be wasted on investigation and |
22 |
patching things up. |
23 |
|
24 |
As example I'd like to use 'ipv6' USE flag, at the moment of writing |
25 |
this email there's 351 ebuilds in tree that expose ipv6 as USE flag, |
26 |
allow it to be disabled. |
27 |
|
28 |
The thing is, it's 2022, and it does not make any sense to *not* support |
29 |
IPv6, even if one does not connect to any network with IPv6, there's no |
30 |
harm to just have it there. |
31 |
|
32 |
While I am all for choice, I am for choice on things that do make sense. |
33 |
For instance, Linux kernel can be built with CONFIG_MULTIUSER=n, someone |
34 |
could argue that since Linux kernel, that is user-configured in Gentoo, |
35 |
can be built without support for other than UID 0, then Gentoo should |
36 |
support it. One of the extreme examples of not supporting something that |
37 |
does not make sense to be supported. |
38 |
|
39 |
Beside 'ipv6', there are other USE flags that I have on mind. 'pam' |
40 |
being another of them. |
41 |
|
42 |
Whats your view on it? |
43 |
|
44 |
-- Piotr. |