Re: [gentoo-user] emerge --newuse misses package that new USE affects

[glen martin]

Holly Bostick wrote:

>glen martin schreef:
>
>
>>As an aside, I wonder whether it is a good feature idea that
>>ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="<keyword>" emerge <foo> without --oneshot should
>>automatically add <foo> <keyword> to the package.keywords file.
>>
>>
>That's an idea with some merit, but imo not enough (merit) to make it
>feasible (but it's not my decision; submit a feature request and see
>what happens).
>
>You now know firsthand one of the many reasons that using
>ACCEPT_KEYWORDS on the command line is *not* recommended.
>
>It is a temporary setting, useful only for testing situations.
>
That makes sense. I hadn't encountered that recommendation at the time -
I'd seen the ACCEPT_KEYWORDS syntax without such warning. Not in the man
page, obviously, which has it right.

> The idea of having the temporary setting invisibly add a permanent
> setting seems cool,

The trick here is the word 'temporary'. If 'temporary', the keyword --oneshot would (should?) be present. In absence thereof ... It seems analogous to the world file - the world file is the permanent specification, and it written per presence or absence of oneshot. Why not so for /etc/portage/package.*? How are those files different-in-kind from world?

I don't know.  I am far from an expert at the design philosophy behind these tools. I just note that there seem to be failures of consistency in application (or not) of a flag across different situations. Permanence for one setting is accomplished with a flag (well, absence), permanence for another requires a file change and the flag is ignored. Or there's a failure in my understanding, which I've found to be very well served by saying the wrong things and waiting for stones.

> So it's not something for me, but I'm weird  ;-)

I am too. Without the smiley. Or so is frequently said. 

glen


-- 
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list