Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > On Tuesday 10 July 2007, William Hubbs wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 09, 2007 at 11:26:19PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > > As for IUSE defaults... There were objections against that feature > > > on the grounds that it's unnecessary and increased maintenance. Do > > > they really offer any benefit over package.use? > > > > Would iuse defaults not be appropriate when a certain use flag is > > recommended as the default for most users for a package?? > > other examples that make sense and are a pain with package.use: > - local USE flags (suddenly not so local huh) > - local USE flags and changing names > - defaults based on version (feature sucked <= 1.x and then rocked >= > 2.x) - developing new ebuilds for personal use > - developing new ebuilds for merging into tree (btw: need to update
- we could finally kick all the no* USE flags. USE flags are use flags - they determine what should be used. not what should not be used... /usr/portage/profiles $ grep :no use.local.desc | wc -l 87 Thilo
pgpCq4ecWgN3q.pgp
Description: PGP signature
