On Tue, 20 Jan 2015 12:02:38 -0800 Zac Medico <[email protected]> wrote: > On 01/20/2015 09:25 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > On Tue, 20 Jan 2015 13:41:21 +0100 > > Ulrich Mueller <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Seriously? You expect users to figure out [1] what combinations of > >> USE flags will work for such an ebuild? > > > > Why don't we just admit that Brian was horribly wrong, scrap > > REQUIRED_USE in the next EAPI, and go back to the sensible, > > tried-and-tested way of doing it that I proposed to begin with? > > Regardless of whether or not (or how) we choose to apply REQUIRED_USE > to various cases, I think we should keep REQUIRED_USE around, since > having a machine-readable representation of these constraints can > potentially be extremely useful to dependency resolvers.
[evidence needed] -- Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
