| 1 |
On 2020-09-08, Neil Bothwick <neil@××××××××××.uk> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Tue, 08 Sep 2020 16:12:38 -0500, Matt Connell (Gmail) wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> > It seems odd that when there's multiple ways to satisfy a |
| 5 |
>> > virtual there's now way to "configure" which one you want for when |
| 6 |
>> > that virtual get's pulled in. Maybe I just haven't run into it often |
| 7 |
>> > enough... |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> I thought about this myself too. I don't think there's any consistency |
| 10 |
>> to it either. For example, virtual/jdk will pull in icedtea-bin, |
| 11 |
>> whereas virtual/rust pulls in dev-lang/rust. It isn't a big deal (to |
| 12 |
>> me) but I also don't fully understand the motivation for all the |
| 13 |
>> decisions. |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
>> Maybe a thought for a future portage feature setting for virtual |
| 16 |
>> ebuilds, like --prefer-binary-virtuals versus --prefer-nonbinary- |
| 17 |
>> virtuals or something? Just spitballing. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> I was thinking along similar lines, or maybe with a prefer-bin USE flag. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> Alternatively, have portage spit out a warning if a virtual is required |
| 22 |
> and none of its alternatives are installed, but that would spoil running |
| 23 |
> portage non-interactively. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
I'd be happy with a simple message when used with --ask that says a |
| 26 |
virtual package has pulled in "X" by default, but "Y or Z" could also |
| 27 |
satisfy that virual. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
If I don't like the default, I can answer "N", do a one-shot install |
| 30 |
of my preference, and try again. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
Grant |
Archives