On Thu, 10 Feb 2011, Ryan Hill wrote:
On Wed, 9 Feb 2011 13:04:11 +0100
Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote:
Maybe we also need a guideline that whenever possible, ebuilds should
accept the default USE flags from our profiles as a valid combination?
Or, in the exceptional case when that
On 02/09/2011 03:11 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
In order to try to avoid forcing users to micro-manage flags too much,
it might make sense to avoid REQUIRED_USE whenever it's possible to do a
build that will almost certainly suit the user's needs. The most common
case that I can imagine where
On Tue, 8 Feb 2011, Ryan Hill wrote:
If we really implemented it in this way, then I fear that it would
be difficult for users to find out what flag combinations they can
use.
The guideline I usually follow is that flags depending on another
flag being set (eg. png needs X) should be
On 02/08/2011 06:20 PM, Ryan Hill wrote:
The guideline I usually follow is that flags depending on another flag being
set (eg. png needs X) should be ignored (you can always ewarn). For flags
that conflict with other flags (exactly one of many, if-this-not-this) use
REQUIRED_USE. Does that
On Wed, 9 Feb 2011 13:04:11 +0100
Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote:
Maybe we also need a guideline that whenever possible, ebuilds should
accept the default USE flags from our profiles as a valid combination?
Or, in the exceptional case when that isn't possible, a package.use
entry should
On Tue, 8 Feb 2011 22:29:11 +0100
Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote:
EAPI 4 introduced the REQUIRED_USE variable, which allows to impose
restrictions on the allowed USE flag combinations for an ebuild.
On the other hand, according to the devmanual, our policy on
conflicting USE flags is
