Andrew Gaffney wrote:
Flag shouldn't be forced, period imo.
I could not agree with this more. I've been watching this whole thread
wondering when certain people were gonna see how dumb this idea actually
is (no offense...I've backed my fair share of dumb ideas). It's a crappy
alternative for
On Mon, 7 Aug 2006 14:14:11 -0700
Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 01:13:34PM -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
> > Brian Harring wrote:
> > > Semantics of USE=-gtk not working on a package that has gtk
> > > forced doesn't sound all that nice btw;
> >
> > Which is why th
Brian Harring wrote:
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 01:13:34PM -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
Brian Harring wrote:
Semantics of USE=-gtk not working on a package that has gtk forced
doesn't sound all that nice btw;
Which is why the flag shouldn't be forced unless it's almost
certain that the flag shouldn't
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 01:13:34PM -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
> Brian Harring wrote:
> > Semantics of USE=-gtk not working on a package that has gtk forced
> > doesn't sound all that nice btw;
>
> Which is why the flag shouldn't be forced unless it's almost
> certain that the flag shouldn't be dis
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 03:52:35PM +, Alec Warner wrote:
>
> >> Brian, default USE in IUSE is not a backwards compatable change and this
> >> is easier ;)
> >
> > An EAPI bump is pretty simple from where I'm sitting, and implementing
> > it isn't all that hard.
> >
> > Meanwhile, the questi
Zac Medico wrote:
> Alec Warner wrote:
>>> Zac Medico wrote:
>>>
Users can unforce them via
/etc/portage/profile/{use.force,package.use.force} in the usual "-flag"
way.
>>> Why new files? Why isn't this just pushed into the use stacking order
>>> over-ridable by the user (default
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Brian Harring wrote:
> Semantics of USE=-gtk not working on a package that has gtk forced
> doesn't sound all that nice btw;
Which is why the flag shouldn't be forced unless it's almost certain that the
flag shouldn't be disabled. The gtk flag migh
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Alec Warner wrote:
> Zac Medico wrote:
>
>> Users can unforce them via
>> /etc/portage/profile/{use.force,package.use.force} in the usual "-flag" way.
>
> Why new files? Why isn't this just pushed into the use stacking order
> over-ridable by the u
>> Brian, default USE in IUSE is not a backwards compatable change and this
>> is easier ;)
>
> An EAPI bump is pretty simple from where I'm sitting, and implementing
> it isn't all that hard.
>
> Meanwhile, the question should be "which is desirable", not "which can
> I glue in quickest" ;)
>
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 10:01:12AM +, Alec Warner wrote:
> Zac Medico wrote:
>
> >Users can unforce them via
> >/etc/portage/profile/{use.force,package.use.force} in the usual "-flag" way.
>
> Why new files? Why isn't this just pushed into the use stacking order
> over-ridable by the user (
Zac Medico wrote:
>Users can unforce them via /etc/portage/profile/{use.force,package.use.force}
>in the usual "-flag" way.
Why new files? Why isn't this just pushed into the use stacking order
over-ridable by the user (default USE flags, and not forcing)?
Then they can over-ride it in package
Brian Harring wrote:
You're asking on the wrong ml. Profile monkeying really should
include a run through of -dev, *especially* something like that that's
going to be a pita to turn off when folks start abusing it...
Make sure you explicitly state that one *must not* force a flag simply becau
On Sun, Aug 06, 2006 at 11:06:54PM -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
> Brian Harring wrote:
> > You're asking on the wrong ml. Profile monkeying really should
> > include a run through of -dev, *especially* something like that that's
> > going to be a pita to turn off when folks start abusing it...
>
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Brian Harring wrote:
> You're asking on the wrong ml. Profile monkeying really should
> include a run through of -dev, *especially* something like that that's
> going to be a pita to turn off when folks start abusing it...
I'm just running it by t
On Sun, Aug 06, 2006 at 10:22:56PM -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I've written a patch [1] that implements support for use.force and
> package.use.force as originally described by Sven Wegener [2] over a year
> ago. Basically, this feature is the exact opposite of use.mask and
> p
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi everyone,
I've written a patch [1] that implements support for use.force and
package.use.force as originally described by Sven Wegener [2] over a year ago.
Basically, this feature is the exact opposite of use.mask and package.use.mask.
It forc
16 matches
Mail list logo
