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 |