[2019-08-11 14:53:34+0200] Michał Górny: > On Sun, 2019-08-11 at 14:46 +0300, Mart Raudsepp wrote: > > The USE flag naming feels a bit to be desired by me. > > That's because I don't believe in USE flags having to be named by the > > external dep they introduce, but by functionality. USE=magic sounds > > like a USE flag that adds some wizards into your application, automagic > > behavior or who knows (until you read the description). > > Not that I have a much better suggestion. USE=auto-mimetypes? > > > > The use of term 'magic' for file type recognition by magic bytes is well > established.
Yes, but `magic` doesn't really gives much of an idea on the feature and could get a bit of confusion, I think `libmagic` is better on this regard as it's closer to what would be used without much context and it's clear that it's about a dependency on sys-apps/file and not some kind of magic feature (which is a quite overloaded word in computing). (auto-mimetype doesn't works at all btw, file/libmagic is much more precise than mimetypes)