1 |
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 21:21, Neil Bothwick <neil@××××××××××.uk> wrote: |
2 |
> On Thu, 28 Oct 2010 18:11:42 +0300, Fatih Tümen wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
>> I agree putting -hal is not a good idea unless you dare to break the |
5 |
>> packages that need hal. But I think there is a third option here |
6 |
> |
7 |
> Packages that need hal won't have a hal use flag. |
8 |
> |
9 |
|
10 |
True, not every package that needs hal has hal use flag. I should have |
11 |
made clear that my implication was those which have (optional) |
12 |
dependency on hal && (thus) has hal flag. For packages that need hal |
13 |
it doesn't matter whether you have -hal in your make.conf anyway, does |
14 |
it? |
15 |
|
16 |
-- |
17 |
Fatih |
18 |
|
19 |
|
20 |
|
21 |
> |
22 |
> -- |
23 |
> Neil Bothwick |
24 |
> |
25 |
> Oxymoron: Reagan memoirs. |
26 |
> |