On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 15:10:21 +0100 Alexander Berntsen <[email protected]> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA256 > > On 30/12/12 15:01, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > Maybe you could suggest a nice beforehand UI for REQUIRED_USE > > constraints. > I think this is orthogonal to the discussion. If ffmpeg had a local > description of bindist, > # equery u ffmpeg > would output an explanation -- and I believe this is the most common > way to check USE-flags on beforehand. as said before, the global useflag description should be updated (GRP is long dead...) > > >> If you happen to have the constraints satisfied for some reason, > >> you will never even get an error. > > > > Meaning you can redistribute the binary. > Yes, but you will never be made aware of the issue. Good for you since there is no issue :) > >> Furthermore, just *why* is the constraint there? Patent > >> infringement? Licence incompatibility? > > > > Because you can't redistribute the binary if the constraint is not > > satisfied :) > Yes, but why not? What is it with this constraint that makes it > inherently not re-distributable unless it is satisfied? > > > bindist does absolutely nothing by itself there. do you really want > > a description like "Enforces license compatibility constraints" ? > That would satisfy the *what* of a local bindist. If you are able to > satisfy the *why* as well, that would be nice. the *why* is not the purpose of a useflag imho: you cant link to openssl from a gpl binary because its a 4 clauses bsd license; i dont remember on top of my head but other constraints also have different reasons; being "license incompatible" as the answer to the *why* is the best you can do there.
