| 1 |
On Fri October 29 2004 17:23, Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
| 2 |
> Personally, I think the groups should be well defined and quite |
| 3 |
> specific. After all, we are simply trying to reduce the number of |
| 4 |
> things a person needs to configure in make.conf, not make it so a person |
| 5 |
> can USE="@GNOME" and expect it to give them everything they would want |
| 6 |
> (or are we?) for a Gnome desktop. I think if we were going to do that, |
| 7 |
> then our best bet would be to start using profiles to add a bunch of |
| 8 |
> stuff. After |
| 9 |
> all, /usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/x86/2004.3/desktop/gnome sounds |
| 10 |
> like a winner. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
I agree with this. It would be more productive to create roles/profiles |
| 13 |
for different machines and preferences. They would never be perfect, but |
| 14 |
then again, few people have their USE flags perfect because the tree is |
| 15 |
always changing in this regard. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
This also plays into providing better enterprise support, because we can |
| 18 |
create roles for servers and business-only workstations, etc. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
I'm not saying USE flag grouping is a bad idea, I just think profiles make |
| 21 |
more sense. Although, you could also implement them both. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Cheers, |
| 24 |
Dylan Carlson [absinthe@g.o] |
| 25 |
Public Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x708E165F |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives