[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)

Reply via email to