Le mardi 21 juin 2011 à 16:05 +0200, Ulrich Mueller a écrit : > >>>>> On Tue, 21 Jun 2011, Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy wrote: > > >> --- Comment #2 from Gilles Dartiguelongue <[email protected]> 2011-06-21 > >> 09:35:59 UTC --- > >> Afaik, the bash-completion eclass adds the use flag only to make > >> sure the user has bash-completion and eselect packages installed. > >> This is imho overkill and it indeed meets the point that was made > >> on the ml that installing one file that doesn't in itself depends > >> on anything doesn't warrant a USE flag. Maybe the discussion should > >> be brought to dev ML to make the situation clearer for > >> bash-completion too. > > > OK let's hear from the ML. Another good thing from bash-completion > > eclass is that it advertises bash-completion in pkg_postinst (though > > some packages miss this). If we're OK for dev-libs/glib not to use > > bash-completion use flag, what about the others, drop the use flag? > > With the flag, some additional files are installed _and_ additional > dependencies like app-shells/bash-completion (which will pull in > further dependencies) are required. Looks like a perfect case for a > USE flag to me. For example, users of embedded systems may not want to > install such additional packages. > > Ulrich >
my point was the same that was made for systemd. The service files are useless until you install systemd, yet the eclass doesn't pull systemd. Hence my request for ml's opinion about why/how bash-completion is any different ? -- Gilles Dartiguelongue <[email protected]> Gentoo
