1 |
On Sunday 15 Jun 2014 19:27:18 Mike Gilbert wrote: |
2 |
> On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 7:31 PM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com> |
3 |
wrote: |
4 |
> > I'm at a loss to explain why this is a good idea or desirable: |
5 |
> > |
6 |
> > !!! The ebuild selected to satisfy |
7 |
> > ">=net-libs/gupnp-0.18[abi_x86_32(-)?,abi_x86_64(-)?,abi_x86_x32(-)?,abi_ |
8 |
> > mips_n32(-)?,abi_mips_n64(-)?,abi_mips_o32(-)?]" has unmet requirements. |
9 |
> > - net-libs/gupnp-0.20.12-r1::gentoo USE="introspection -connman |
10 |
> > -networkmanager" ABI_X86="64 -32 -x32" PYTHON_TARGETS="python2_7 |
11 |
> > -python2_6" |
12 |
> > |
13 |
> > The following REQUIRED_USE flag constraints are unsatisfied: |
14 |
> > exactly-one-of ( connman networkmanager ) |
15 |
> > |
16 |
> > USE="upnp" is pulling this in, the major user of that flag here is |
17 |
> > farstream. |
18 |
> > |
19 |
> > Maybe I want farstream. Maybe I want upnp for it. |
20 |
> > Maybe I don't care for connman or networkmanager (I use wicd, some users |
21 |
> > want no nw manager at all) |
22 |
> > |
23 |
> > So, what is the sense behind a feature of an instant messenger framework |
24 |
> > causing me to decide between two undesirable connection managers? |
25 |
> > |
26 |
> > Anyone see some valid logic that I miss? |
27 |
> |
28 |
> I'm pretty sure this was a simple developer error. |
29 |
> |
30 |
> REQUIRED_USE="^^ ( connman networkmanager )" should have been |
31 |
> REQUIRED_USE="?? ( connman networkmanager )". |
32 |
> |
33 |
> The former requires that exactly one flag be enabled. The latter |
34 |
> requires that at most one flag may be enabled. |
35 |
|
36 |
Why "at most one flag may be enabled"? What if *both* connman and |
37 |
networkmanager are installed in a system? Will emerge error out? |
38 |
|
39 |
-- |
40 |
Regards, |
41 |
Mick |