On 2016-06-02 03:42 PM, waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 09:31:11AM -0400, Damien Levac wrote
IMHO, you see this in reverse. the 'gui' useflag would be useful for
users who don't want to care about X/wayland/mir and do not want to care
about gtk/qt, they just want windows to be drawn for the applications
they install -- without, if possible, pulling useless dependencies.
How, exactly, will the app draw windows without linking against one of
X/wayland/mir/qt4/qt5/gtk2/gtk3/fltk or whatever else comes down the
pike?
It will be linked to one of those, but the users don't want to care so
reasonable default would apply.
For example, if I have setup my profile to be 'plasma', then having
'gui' in my global use flags would mean "build with qt5 support to
provide my gui whenever possible, if not possible, fallback to whatever
is available at the discretion of the package maintainer".
2 nice properties I foresee this feature will have:
* If you do not like it, don't use it. It shouldn't affect any user
unless they explicitly use the flag.
* Negating the flag would mean to not build any GUI (i.e. headless
server) which is cleaner than: '-qt3support -qt4 -qt5 -gtk -gtk3 -X
-waylang...'
I do not think the question is whether the flag would be useful: it
will. The question is: can it be implemented efficiently...
