On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 03:46:47 -0700 Brian Harring <ferri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:48:37AM +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > >>>>> On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Brian Harring wrote: > > > > | Occasionally, ebuilds will have conflicting USE flags for > > | functionality. Checking for them and returning an error is not a > > | viable solution. Instead, you must pick one of the USE flags in > > | conflict to favour. > > > > [1] <http://devmanual.gentoo.org/general-concepts/use-flags/> > > I honestly consider the ebuild silently making decisions on the user's > behalf *worse*. Consider if openoffice silently made decisions like > that- 4 hours later it'll wind up choosing the option you didn't > really want and you'll be in a foul mood. If I'm getting this right the proposed behavior is such that in case of conflicting use flags emerge fails and user gets a message that he has to set use flags as required. If so then I think it is not the right way to handle it. A package manager should be able do deal with (use flag) dependencies automatically. Similarly as it deals with "normal" package dependenicies. It should not do this silenly though. emerge -pv should display real state of use flags; so if some use flag has to be turned on automatically due to dependency/conflict then it has to be shown so. This apply also for package[use_flag] deps. It is not very convenient to fiddle use flags for individual packages that I basically do not care about because they are just dependencies; so natural expectation is that package manager pulls required deps. automatically (whether it means install a package or install a package _with_ switched use flag). I hope this does not sound that I'm dictating you what is the right way to do things. I just wanted to express my opinion. And I admit that perhaps I do not see possible negative consequences of such behaviour. Regards, Robert -- Robert Cernansky E-mail: hslis...@zoznam.sk Jabber: h...@jabber.sk
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
