1 |
>>>>> On Wed, 25 Jun 2014, Michał Górny wrote: |
2 |
|
3 |
> "-foo@" or "-foo%" are also possible but that's a poor man's |
4 |
> workaround for current syntax ugliness. |
5 |
|
6 |
We cannot use @ because it's a legal character in flag names. |
7 |
|
8 |
> The real alternative is: |
9 |
|
10 |
> <use> |
11 |
> <flag name="foo" default="off" runtime="yes"/> |
12 |
> </use> |
13 |
|
14 |
> :P |
15 |
|
16 |
Wrong mailing list, and more than 10 years late: :) |
17 |
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.zynot.general/4 |
18 |
|
19 |
> Of course, your arguments are valid, so we can pretty much use the |
20 |
> simpler version in the PMS. Even then, most points listed verbosely |
21 |
> in GLEP would be implied, so we could do the checks. |
22 |
|
23 |
My feeling is that our present rules for IUSE_EFFECTIVE and |
24 |
IUSE_REFERENCEABLE are already complicated enough. The package |
25 |
manager should treat runtime switchable flags as normal USE flags, |
26 |
except when deciding if a package should be rebuilt. |
27 |
|
28 |
What we add on top of this as tree policy (repoman etc.) is another |
29 |
issue. |
30 |
|
31 |
Ulrich |