| 1 |
George Shapovalov wrote: |
| 2 |
> ??????, 21. ??????? 2006 03:46, Diego 'Flameeyes' Petteno` ?? ????????: |
| 3 |
>> On Wednesday 21 June 2006 03:34, Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> OK, so we can add qt3 to make.defaults. |
| 5 |
>> -* says nothing to you? :) |
| 6 |
> Now I am confused: |
| 7 |
> My understanding of that proposal was that qt3 is meant to mean "prefer qt3 |
| 8 |
> over qt4", rather than "enable qt3 unconditionally and see what can be done |
| 9 |
> about qt4". So which one is that? |
| 10 |
> If it is former (preference flag) I do not see aproblem there: |
| 11 |
> -qt +qt3 = -qt in such reading. |
| 12 |
> So, basically the question is about interpretation of -qt +qt3 construct.. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> George |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
And, USE='qt -qt3 -qt4' means? See, this gets very tricky and makes for |
| 17 |
butt-ugly dependency and other constructs in ebuilds once more than two |
| 18 |
flags get involved, as the various combos start be nonsensical. Also, |
| 19 |
users generally "rock" in inventing sucky use flag combos and |
| 20 |
interpreting them in most whacky ways. Turns bugs into discussions about |
| 21 |
what a particular use flag (or combo of flags) should mean. It's very |
| 22 |
hard to ensure consistent use in all ebuilds. Will just do more harm |
| 23 |
than good. I've seen a major decline of this type of bugs since the |
| 24 |
gtk/gtk2 mess got more or less sorted out, we shouldn't repeat past |
| 25 |
mistakes. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
Best regards, |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Jakub Moc |
| 32 |
mailto:jakub@g.o |
| 33 |
GPG signature: |
| 34 |
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E |
| 35 |
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
... still no signature ;) |
Archives