Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Try to specify how to get that a USE flag is present in current ebuild

[Pacho Ramos]

El dom, 23-09-2012 a las 05:52 +0000, Alec Warner escribió:
> On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Pacho Ramos <pacho@g.o> wrote:
> > El sáb, 22-09-2012 a las 13:54 -0400, Mike Frysinger escribió:
> >> On Friday 21 September 2012 15:08:20 Pacho Ramos wrote:
> >> > In that one, we try to use the following:
> >> > has vala ${IUSE//+/} && ! use vala && return 0
> >>
> >> inherit eutils
> >> use_if_iuse vala
> >> -mike
> >
> > I am aware of that one also, but Ciaran also wants to forbid it for the
> > same reason :S
>
> Well I assume Ciaran wants to forbid it because he is attempting to
> write a PMS compliant PM; but in order to use these ebuilds properly
> he has to emulate the unspecified behavior that the ebuilds rely on
> upon. His claim is that the council is supposed to forbid this
> behavior (presumably to make his job less horrible) but I don't see
> them beating down your door to change it (and the behavior is not
> new.)
>
> -A
>
>

My point of view is that, as this is already supported in portage (and
probably in other PMs as, otherwise, they would have had a lot of
problems with, for example, a lot of packages inheritting important
eclasses like gnome2, cmake-utils or xorg-2) and also used in the tree
for years, the easiest solution is to simply specify current behavior
for existing eapis, needing to wait for a new one to change that
behavior.

As I pointed in http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gentoo/dev/260662
other options would be:
- wait for next eapi to specify that, the problem is that, if that eapi
take a long time to be approved, we would need to move all
eclasses/ebuilds to the other non-automatic way to later revert 
them back.
- include this specification in eapi5 as it's still not allowed in the
tree (maybe for this a council meeting should be soon enough I guess)