On Sat, Apr 7, 2018 at 12:57 PM, Lars Wendler <polynomia...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On Sat, 7 Apr 2018 14:16:33 -0500 William Hubbs wrote: > >>On Sat, Apr 07, 2018 at 02:55:53PM -0400, Michael Orlitzky wrote: >>> On 04/07/2018 02:44 PM, William Hubbs wrote: >>> > >>> > I'm with floppym on this one. Is there a specific reason we enable >>> > them globally? >>> >>> It's a relic from before we had IUSE defaults. >>> >>> >>> > Since there has been so little discussion on this thread, I will >>> > start looking at what I need to do to remove these use flags from >>> > the profiles. >>> >>> There's probably a few packages that will need IUSE defaults to avoid >>> breakage, and everyone else should get fair warning before the flags >>> are turned off by default. >> >>There is the case of packages that optionally use a db back end, >>and I would argue that those may not need iuse defaults. >> >>It could also be argued that having one backend enabled globally is >>good for consistency, but that would end up leading down a bikeshed >>path that I'm not sure we should go down. I'm just not sure it makes >>sense to enable more than one of these backends globally. >> >>Thoughts? >> >>William >> > > Considering the questionable license situation with latest sys-libs/db > releases (AGPL), I'd say we should prefer gdbm over berkdb in case we > want to keep one db backend default enabled. > IIRC Fedora is even trying to entirely getting rid of berkdb.
Interesting. I wasn't aware of that. Here's a link with more information: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1361971
