| 1 |
On 6/28/06, Richard Fish <bigfish@××××××××××.org> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 6/28/06, Jarry <jarry@×××.net> wrote: |
| 3 |
> > And that's what I'd expect, even with minimal use-flag: |
| 4 |
> > server, not client. And if "minimal" removes server |
| 5 |
> > functionality, than it does remove critical features |
| 6 |
> > (if you remove server-functionality, it is not server anymore). |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> There was a recent discussion on -dev regarding this. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> http://www.mail-archive.com/gentoo-dev%40lists.gentoo.org/msg12245.html |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Thanks Richard, after a bit of thinking the OP got a point, it is |
| 14 |
somehow confusing how this flag affects the package... |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
-- |
| 17 |
Daniel da Veiga |
| 18 |
Computer Operator - RS - Brazil |
| 19 |
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- |
| 20 |
Version: 3.1 |
| 21 |
GCM/IT/P/O d-? s:- a? C++$ UBLA++ P+ L++ E--- W+++$ N o+ K- w O M- V- |
| 22 |
PS PE Y PGP- t+ 5 X+++ R+* tv b+ DI+++ D+ G+ e h+ r+ y++ |
| 23 |
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ |
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives