| 1 |
On Tuesday 10 July 2007, William Hubbs wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Mon, Jul 09, 2007 at 11:26:19PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 3 |
> > As for IUSE defaults... There were objections against that feature on |
| 4 |
> > the grounds that it's unnecessary and increased maintenance. Do they |
| 5 |
> > really offer any benefit over package.use? |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> Would iuse defaults not be appropriate when a certain use flag is |
| 8 |
> recommended as the default for most users for a package?? |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
other examples that make sense and are a pain with package.use: |
| 11 |
- local USE flags (suddenly not so local huh) |
| 12 |
- local USE flags and changing names |
| 13 |
- defaults based on version (feature sucked <= 1.x and then rocked >= 2.x) |
| 14 |
- developing new ebuilds for personal use |
| 15 |
- developing new ebuilds for merging into tree (btw: need to update all these |
| 16 |
other files in profiles/ instead of just committing the one ebuild) |
| 17 |
-mike |
Archives