Gentoo Archives: gentoo-portage-dev

From: Brian Harring <ferringb@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] use.force and package.use.force (bug #142853)
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2006 05:42:57
Message-Id: 20060807054210.GA14616@seldon
In Reply to: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] use.force and package.use.force (bug #142853) by Zac Medico
1 On Sun, Aug 06, 2006 at 10:22:56PM -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
2 > Hi everyone,
3 >
4 > I've written a patch [1] that implements support for use.force and package.use.force as originally described by Sven Wegener [2] over a year ago. Basically, this feature is the exact opposite of use.mask and package.use.mask. It forces USE flags to be enabled. The only way to disable these forced flags is to mask them via use.mask/package.use.mask or to "unforce" them in the profile stack. Users can unforce them via /etc/portage/profile/{use.force,package.use.force} in the usual "-flag" way.
5 >
6 > One of the many benefits that this will provide is the ability to invert the no* USE flags so that any flags can potentially have positive meaning if we choose. Some type of functionality like this is certainly needed. Shall we add support for this?
7
8 You're asking on the wrong ml. Profile monkeying really should
9 include a run through of -dev, *especially* something like that that's
10 going to be a pita to turn off when folks start abusing it...
11
12 Prefer default IUSE myself, but the point this should get a run
13 through on dev stands....
14 ~harring

Replies