| 1 |
On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 11:00:52 -0600 |
| 2 |
»Q« <boxcars@×××.net> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 12:06:22 +0000 |
| 5 |
> Neil Bothwick <neil@××××××××××.uk> wrote: |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> > I suspect this is |
| 8 |
> > specific to the KDE ebuilds (or eclass). changed-use should only |
| 9 |
> > skip an ebuild with changed flags if re-emerging would produce |
| 10 |
> > exactly the same code as before, this may not be the case. For |
| 11 |
> > example, in some ebuilds, it is the absence of a USE flag that |
| 12 |
> > triggers an extra configure option, so removing that use flag would |
| 13 |
> > give the same code as if the package had been emerged with it |
| 14 |
> > enabled. |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> > Something like this happened recently with the nls flag on glibc. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> Ah, that makes sense -- thanks. (And now I wish I'd read the entire |
| 19 |
> thread in dev before I posted a few minutes ago.) |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> IMO, the man page's section on --changed-use should say what you've |
| 22 |
> just said rather than what it says now. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
I saw the logs from the kde team meeting where they discussed removing |
| 25 |
kdeenablefinal and decided when to do it. My own update on that ran |
| 26 |
overnight so I wasn't too fazed. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
But is this not a case where the kde eclass *explictly* set the USE |
| 29 |
flag off? (Disclaimer: haven't read the eclass). In that case portage |
| 30 |
would not know what to do when the flag goes away so the behaviour we |
| 31 |
saw would not really be a bug, it would be "playing safe" |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
--changed-use is intended for cases like a flag you are not using at |
| 34 |
all goes away. Caveat: Even then it could still break in subtle ways |
| 35 |
with dodgy ebuilds. Caveat emptor. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
-- |
| 40 |
Alan McKinnnon |
| 41 |
alan.mckinnon@×××××.com |
Archives