On Thu, 09 May 2013 05:56:42 -0400 "Anthony G. Basile" <bas...@opensource.dyc.edu> wrote:
> On 05/08/2013 10:01 PM, Jeroen Roovers wrote: > > On Wed, 8 May 2013 21:48:36 -0400 > > "Walter Dnes" <waltd...@waltdnes.org> wrote: > > > >> Wouldn't the "systemd" USE flag be the appropriate one to key on? > >> The description in /usr/portage/profiles/use.desc says... > >> > >> systemd - Enable use of systemd-specific libraries and features like > >> socket activation or session tracking > >> > >> Surely, units files qualify as "systemd-specific features". > > > > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=198901 > > People keep saying disk space is not an issue but it is on embedded > systems. Even 4k or one i-node. So the choice to not install unit > files is important. I'm sympathetic to the idea of reducing use flags > and I would really not like to see USE="openrc" or "systemd" everywhere. > Without having tested, it does seem that INSTALL_MASK is sufficient. > I recommend going that route and documenting it. We should probably consider extending the INSTALL_MASK a bit. A good idea would be to allow repositories to pre-define names for INSTALL_MASK (alike USE flags) and allow portage to control them over those names. A similar variant is implemented in app-portage/install-mask which maps names obtained from ${FILESDIR} to paths. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
