Gentoo Archives: gentoo-portage-dev

From: Donnie Berkholz <spyderous@g.o>
To: gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] backend support for FEATURES=debug-build (again)
Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 00:05:22
Message-Id: 4463D0EC.2000907@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] backend support for FEATURES=debug-build (again) by Mike Frysinger
1 Mike Frysinger wrote:
2 > On Thursday 11 May 2006 14:23, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
3 >> Mike Frysinger wrote:
4 >>> On Thursday 11 May 2006 02:41, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
5 >>>> That's why x-modular.eclass has USE=debug to accomplish the same thing.
6 >>> which is totally wrong
7 >>>
8 >>> read the thread i started on gentoo-dev where i went over how USE=debug
9 >>> in the portage tree is complete trash atm
10 >> It may be wrong, but it's the only way that works usefully.
11 >
12 > so you'd rather stick with a known crappy/inconsistent methodology then move
13 > in the proper direction ?
14 >
15 > this debug-build FEATURES is the proper direction
16
17 I agree with the direction, when one includes the per-package env bit.
18
19 >> This is totally useless IMHO until you can set it on a per-package level,
20 >
21 > bashrc hacks can add insert FEATURES on a per package basis until proper
22 > portage support is in place, but unlike the previous bashrc suggestion, this
23 > is a stop gap, not the correct, solution
24 >
25 > i'm willing to forgo this (imo) minor aspect in favor of cutting the
26 > unreliable USE=debug from the tree
27
28 I'm not. But I will agree that this is the correct direction. Once both
29 parts of the puzzle are in place, then I will support cutting USE=debug
30 -- but not until one can reproduce its functionality sans hacks. No
31 point in replacing one hack with another.
32
33 Thanks,
34 Donnie

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature