| 1 |
On Tue, 08 Sep 2020 16:12:38 -0500, Matt Connell (Gmail) wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> > It seems odd that when there's multiple ways to satisfy a |
| 4 |
> > virtual there's now way to "configure" which one you want for when |
| 5 |
> > that virtual get's pulled in. Maybe I just haven't run into it often |
| 6 |
> > enough... |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> I thought about this myself too. I don't think there's any consistency |
| 9 |
> to it either. For example, virtual/jdk will pull in icedtea-bin, |
| 10 |
> whereas virtual/rust pulls in dev-lang/rust. It isn't a big deal (to |
| 11 |
> me) but I also don't fully understand the motivation for all the |
| 12 |
> decisions. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Maybe a thought for a future portage feature setting for virtual |
| 15 |
> ebuilds, like --prefer-binary-virtuals versus --prefer-nonbinary- |
| 16 |
> virtuals or something? Just spitballing. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
I was thinking along similar lines, or maybe with a prefer-bin USE flag. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Alternatively, have portage spit out a warning if a virtual is required |
| 21 |
and none of its alternatives are installed, but that would spoil running |
| 22 |
portage non-interactively. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Another option would be for each virtual have have a set of USE flags |
| 25 |
corresponding to its choices, but that could get very messy very quickly. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
Neil Bothwick |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Next time you wave at me, use more than one finger, please. |
Archives