| 1 |
On Tue, 08 Apr 2008 14:36:45 +0200, Michael Schmarck wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> >> Which majorly sucks, as there are good reasons why the packages |
| 4 |
> >> should NOT be the way they are right now. |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > Such as? |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Finer control, without cluttering the world file. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
What could be finer than picking which packages you want to install. The |
| 11 |
KDE meta packages are for people who don't want fine control. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> > Hint: uncluttering the world file is not a reason for changing the |
| 14 |
> > ebuilds, |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> Why not? |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
1) Because a cluttered world file is hardly a big deal, and far less |
| 19 |
likely to have unforeseen consequences than a cluttered USE list and |
| 20 |
package.use file. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
2) Because if the format does become too unwieldy for the job, fix the |
| 23 |
format instead of kludging around with ebuilds. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
Neil Bothwick |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
The opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth. * |
| 30 |
Bohr |
Archives