On 03/20/2012 11:47 AM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 21:15:45 -0600
Ryan Hill<dirtye...@gentoo.org> wrote:
On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 15:05:46 -0300
Alexis Ballier<aball...@gentoo.org> wrote:
imho it doesnt hurt anyone to have fine-grained control
what could be discussed is to put these into a use expand variable,
to better distinguish between important useflags and less important
ones
is that what you mean by 'putting these under "tools" or
something?' ?
No, I meant one USE flag, called "tools", that builds and installs
all or none of them. Unless they have external dependencies, or
extraordinary build times, or licensing issues, then I can't see a
situation where someone would want or need to pick and choose like
this. If you disagree then I suppose an expanded variable is an
improvement, though I don't like them myself.
Kudos on the USE flag descriptions in any case. Very informative.
well, there's no extra dep nor licensing issue, and its not that they
are big either, problem is with a merged useflag to rule them all we'll
lose all the descriptions; i can imagine:
tools - install random extra tools
vs. a per tool useflag describing what it is for
i clearly prefer the latter, even if it requires me 5 more minutes to
decide the fate of the useflags i'll build the package with
personally i dont like the tools useflag, the same i dont like the
server one or the minimal one. they're too generic and, for this reason,
useless
if we want to make it a use expand, the only thing we need to agree on
is the prefix i think: what about fftools ? ffmpegtools ?
Maybe there could be use expand that could be reused by other ebuilds
too? Such as EXTERNAL_TOOLS ?
- Samuli
