On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 9:45 PM, Vlastimil Babka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I think it's better to prevent this rather than waste time with bug > reports like that. I asked Zac on IRC whether portage could filter such > flags. He suggested using use.mask in profiles. Well since ARCH is also > set by a profile, why not. Although a really persistent and stupid user > could use.unmask, it's better than no protection. And then we can think > how to replace the current ARCH->USE flag system with e.g. USE_EXPAND. > What do you think? >
Seems like an acceptable workaround. For future EAPIs, ARCH could be a regular USE_EXPANDed flag as you suggest, and package managers could filter any flag in USE which is not listed in IUSE. Regards, -- Santiago M. Mola Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
