On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 14:15:19 -0700 Daniel Ostrow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | On Sun, 2006-10-15 at 22:01 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | > On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 22:35:10 +0200 Jakub Moc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | > wrote: | > | > Which is why I suggested changing Portage's behaviour earlier | > | > in the thread. Like it or not, overlays are already getting | > | > complex enough that they'd benefit from profile behaviour. | > | | > | Because maintaining your own profiles and stacking them and | > | dealing with all the related mess is a _lot_ easier that sticking | > | a + before foo in IUSE. Right. ;) | > | > You mean, than sticking a + before foo in IUSE in every ebuild, and | > ensuring that changes are kept in sync and consistent with the | > behaviour of every single existing profile. | | No one here is talking about doing that... | | What we are talking about is an instance where foo is *not* enabled by | default in profiles but there is *one* package where it is upstreams | intention that foo be enabled by default but they still provide the | capability to turn foo support off. This package (and all of the | ebuilds that are in the tree for it) would have a +foo in IUSE...thus | even though foo is generally off unless the user specifies -foo in | either make.conf or package.use foo is turned on for this package and | this package alone.
Yes, that's what's being discussed. Moving something that's currently in one nice central location out into multiple ebuilds. | No one is talking about replacing tree wide defaults with this | functionality...this is for package maintainers to specify default | behavior for their package and their package alone independent of the | profiles intent. Yes, and it's going to create wildly inconsistent behaviour all over the place when people start using it. | Doing it your way in order to make sure that a package was built the | way a maintainer intended (by default) they would have to make an | entry in package.use in every single tier one profile (at the moment | only base)... Yes, over all one profile. Last time I checked, one was smaller than the number of ebuilds for most packages. | this is also something that they cannot enforce over | external overlays...so it looses any value at all. Read earlier in the thread for my remarks on that. -- Ciaran McCreesh Mail : ciaranm at ciaranm.org Web : http://ciaranm.org/ as-needed is broken : http://ciaranm.org/show_post.pl?post_id=13
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
