1 |
On 07/05/2011 12:23 AM, Neil Bothwick wrote: |
2 |
> On Mon, 4 Jul 2011 16:57:55 +0200, Daniel Pielmeier wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
>>>> use --changed-use to avoid a rebuild |
5 |
>>>> instead of --new-use like Neil suggested. |
6 |
>>> |
7 |
>>> This only works if you *permanently* switch to --changed-use, otherwise |
8 |
>>> you'll just postpone things to next time you use --new-use. |
9 |
> |
10 |
> I haven't used --new-use for years. What's the point of rebuilding |
11 |
> packages just because irrelevant USE flags have changed? |
12 |
> |
13 |
>> I know I am not a fan of --changed-use myself |
14 |
> |
15 |
> Why not? I see no downside to it but I'm willing to be educated. |
16 |
|
17 |
Imagine this: A package is built by default with Gtk as well as with Qt |
18 |
support. There is no USE flag which would omit building with one of |
19 |
those. Then, the ebuild developer introduces those USE flags. |
20 |
--changed-use will not catch this, so you will continue having both Gtk |
21 |
and Qt support in the package, even though you're interested only in one |
22 |
of them (Gnome vs KDE user, for example). |
23 |
|
24 |
Or, imagine another scenario. A package offers multithreading support, |
25 |
resulting in a huge speed-up on machines with more than one core or CPU. |
26 |
But the ebuild configures and builds the package without |
27 |
multithreading, and there's no USE flag. When the ebuild dev puts a USE |
28 |
flag in there (and probably turns it on by default), --changed-use will |
29 |
also not catch this, because it's not a USE flag that changed, but |
30 |
instead a new one that wasn't there before. So you will continue |
31 |
running the package in its slow built, missing out on the big |
32 |
performance gain. |
33 |
|
34 |
I guess this is why people don't use --changed-use. It won't catch |
35 |
cases like the above. |