On Sat, 2006-06-10 at 02:01 +0100, Roy Marples wrote: > On Saturday 10 June 2006 01:33, Alec Warner wrote: > > > So we have two use flags - client and server. Here are the possabilities > > > > > > -client -server > > > +client -server > > > +client +server > > > -client +server > > > > > > Do we read -client -server and +client +server to mean the same thing? > > > If so the logic can read > > > > > > if use client || ! use server ; then > > > # build client > > > fi > > > if use server || ! use client ; then > > > # build server > > > fi > > > > > > How does portage stop us from doing that now? > > > > built_with_use is then incorrect, since for -client -server you really > > built both. > > use client && build client > use server && build server > > The problem here is that breaks existing ebuilds, which could be viewed as > equally bad. > > But technically built_with_use isn't incorrect as the ebuild wasn't built > with > it. To effectively use built_with_use you cannot assume that the flag does > what it says on the tin - you have to inspect the ebuild code you're > querying.
> Prior history shows deps of db vs gdbm where if both or neither then db was > used, otherwise the flagged db was used. Maybe along the same lines as what you are pointing out here it should also be noted that built_with_use is semi faulty and can return wrong results when no /var/db/pkg/$CATEGORY/$PVR/USE exists. This happens when using the most recent ppc-uclibc stages which omitted a few entries from the vdb. We end up having some ebuild or other assuming that uclibc itself was built with +nls when it's really (-nls) use.masked etc.. > Roy Marples <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Gentoo/Linux Developer (baselayout, networking) -- Ned Ludd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Gentoo Linux -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
