Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] per-package use.mask (bug 96368)

[Brian Harring]

On Sun, Aug 06, 2006 at 10:39:19PM -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
> Brian Harring wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 06, 2006 at 02:54:36AM -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
> >> seems to me that we'd also have to implement use-dep matching in
> >> order to correctly support use-dep syntax.
> >
> > If you were actually supporting use deps, yes.  You're not
> > however- package.use.mask is just a kludge in the (hopefully short)
> > interim.
>
> It doesn't make any sense to me to have use-deps syntax without support for use-deps matching.  Sorry.

One question then- what's the long term plan for use deps?  Both 
getting there, and transitioning to 'em?

Might seem stupid, but profiles have _no_ versioning builtin, so 
anything that gets shoved in can be extremely tricky to rip out down 
the line.

In other words, long term, what's the intention here?  Shift over to 
package.mask with use deps (what this file is) how exactly, since the 
only way I see is when y'all get use-deps, all of that data has to be 
duplicated in package.mask and have the file flipped off in the same 
version- not really an option obviously, meaning this file stays long 
term.

Hence why I'm poking on this- features are nice, but portage has a bit 
of a history as being a ball of scarily duct taped together features, 
wondering what the actual plan is here (both on the use masking and 
the forcing).

So... grand plan here?

~harring