| 1 |
On Friday 15 June 2007, Alexander Skwar wrote: |
| 2 |
> > and a |
| 3 |
> > mechanism to put use flags into split ebuilds and let the devs |
| 4 |
> > decide which ones are worth persuing? |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> With "split ebuilds" you mean for example the ebuild for kppp? Or |
| 7 |
> are you talking about the kde*-meta ebuilds? |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Sorry for not being clearer. I meant USE flags in the -meta ebuilds, to |
| 10 |
disable undesired apps like kppp. Sort of like: |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
DEPEND=" |
| 13 |
kde-base/this-app |
| 14 |
!nokppp? ( kde-base/kppp ) |
| 15 |
kde-base/that-app |
| 16 |
" |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
I use a no* flag as the default should be to install everything except |
| 19 |
the stuff the user doesn't want. Expecting user to enable a bunch of |
| 20 |
flags to get the equivalent of an upstream ebuild is a bit much :-) |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> My focus is on the meta ebuilds. There I'd like to be able to control |
| 23 |
> to a finer degree, what's to be installed and what's not to be |
| 24 |
> installed. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
So, we're on the same wavelength. Think I'll pop over to bgo and add my |
| 27 |
voice to the comments... |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
alan |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
Optimists say the glass is half full, |
| 33 |
Pessimists say the glass is half empty, |
| 34 |
Developers say wtf is the glass twice as big as it needs to be? |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Alan McKinnon |
| 37 |
alan at linuxholdings dot co dot za |
| 38 |
+27 82, double three seven, one nine three five |
| 39 |
-- |
| 40 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives