On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 7:30 PM, Jonatan Liljedahl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Michael Homer wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 6:33 AM, Hisham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 3:58 AM, Daniele Maccari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >> > Michael Homer wrote:
> >> >
Michael Homer wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 6:33 AM, Hisham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 3:58 AM, Daniele Maccari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Michael Homer wrote:
>> > > It would be silly to write that, since the flag definitely won't be
>> > > enabled by defaul
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 6:33 AM, Hisham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 3:58 AM, Daniele Maccari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Michael Homer wrote:
> > > It would be silly to write that, since the flag definitely won't be
> > > enabled by default. -gtk1 won't do anything
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 6:26 AM, Hisham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 5:09 AM, Michael Homer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 13, 2008 at 8:03 PM, jan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Saturday 12 April 2008 20:06:10 Michael Homer wrote:
> > > > The environm
Hisham wrote:
> If they're not "real" in the sense that they are not Gentoo-equivalent
> use flags, then yes, they're not. But if they're not use flags, then
> what are they? I find it better to keep the name than to just invent a
> name and have to explain it to people like "well, they're basicall
On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 3:58 AM, Daniele Maccari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Michael Homer wrote:
> > It would be silly to write that, since the flag definitely won't be
> > enabled by default. -gtk1 won't do anything unless you've already
> > enabled it yourself earlier in the file.
> > -Mich
On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 5:09 AM, Michael Homer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 13, 2008 at 8:03 PM, jan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Saturday 12 April 2008 20:06:10 Michael Homer wrote:
> > > The environment variable takes a space-separated list of flag
> > > specifications (rath
On Sun, Apr 13, 2008 at 8:03 PM, jan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Saturday 12 April 2008 20:06:10 Michael Homer wrote:
> > The environment variable takes a space-separated list of flag
> > specifications (rather than newline), so it accepts a special syntax
> > for the specifications, with ';
Michael Homer wrote:
> It would be silly to write that, since the flag definitely won't be
> enabled by default. -gtk1 won't do anything unless you've already
> enabled it yourself earlier in the file.
> -Michael
That's an interesting point. They're not *real* use flags then, since
choosing to dis
On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 7:40 AM, Jonatan Liljedahl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 2:16 PM, Daniele Maccari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hisham wrote:
> >> > On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 11:01 AM, Daniele Maccari
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >
> >>
> On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 2:16 PM, Daniele Maccari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>>
>> Hisham wrote:
>> > On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 11:01 AM, Daniele Maccari
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Jonatan Liljedahl wrote:
>> >> > Or something like this:
>> >> >
>> >> > with_gtk1=(
>> >> >
On Saturday 12 April 2008 20:06:10 Michael Homer wrote:
> The environment variable takes a space-separated list of flag
> specifications (rather than newline), so it accepts a special syntax
> for the specifications, with ';' instead of a space when listing
> programs to go with a flag. It takes th
Michael Homer wrote:
> Yes. That is the desired behaviour. Having to enable the flags for
> everything a pain. We also want the recipes to be as short as
> possible, so in most cases you don't have to add anything to them at
> all, and the autodetection in configure just does the right thing.
>
On Sun, Apr 13, 2008 at 5:34 AM, Daniele Maccari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hisham wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 2:16 PM, Daniele Maccari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Hisham wrote:
> >> > On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 11:01 AM, Daniele Maccari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >> >> Jonatan
On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 10:55 PM, Jonatan Liljedahl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jonatan Liljedahl wrote:
> > Michael Homer wrote:
> > ...
> >> In most cases, dependencies are autodetected by configure correctly
> >> and no change to the Recipe file will be necessary. In that case, the
> >> wi
Hisham wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 2:16 PM, Daniele Maccari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Hisham wrote:
>> > On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 11:01 AM, Daniele Maccari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Jonatan Liljedahl wrote:
>> >> > Or something like this:
>> >> >
>> >> > with_g
On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 2:16 PM, Daniele Maccari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hisham wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 11:01 AM, Daniele Maccari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Jonatan Liljedahl wrote:
> >> > Or something like this:
> >> >
> >> > with_gtk1=(
> >> > "--enable-
Hisham wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 11:01 AM, Daniele Maccari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Jonatan Liljedahl wrote:
>> > Or something like this:
>> >
>> > with_gtk1=(
>> > "--enable-gtk"
>> > "--disable-gtk"
>> > )
>> >
>> > or more self-documenting:
>> >
>> > useflag_gtk1=(
On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 11:01 AM, Daniele Maccari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jonatan Liljedahl wrote:
> > Or something like this:
> >
> > with_gtk1=(
> > "--enable-gtk"
> > "--disable-gtk"
> > )
> >
> > or more self-documenting:
> >
> > useflag_gtk1=(
> > "with=--enable-gtk"
> >
Jonatan Liljedahl wrote:
> Daniele Maccari wrote:
>
>> Jonatan Liljedahl wrote:
>>
>>> Or something like this:
>>>
>>> with_gtk1=(
>>> "--enable-gtk"
>>> "--disable-gtk"
>>> )
>>>
>>> or more self-documenting:
>>>
>>> useflag_gtk1=(
>>> "with=--enable-gtk"
>>> "without=--disable-gtk
Daniele Maccari wrote:
> Jonatan Liljedahl wrote:
>> Or something like this:
>>
>> with_gtk1=(
>> "--enable-gtk"
>> "--disable-gtk"
>> )
>>
>> or more self-documenting:
>>
>> useflag_gtk1=(
>> "with=--enable-gtk"
>> "without=--disable-gtk"
>> )
>>
>> Those would be easy parsable by bash its
Jonatan Liljedahl wrote:
> Or something like this:
>
> with_gtk1=(
> "--enable-gtk"
> "--disable-gtk"
> )
>
> or more self-documenting:
>
> useflag_gtk1=(
> "with=--enable-gtk"
> "without=--disable-gtk"
> )
>
> Those would be easy parsable by bash itself...
>
Sure, the possibilities are
Daniele Maccari wrote:
> Jonatan Liljedahl wrote:
>> Michael Homer wrote:
>> ...
>>
>>> In most cases, dependencies are autodetected by configure correctly
>>> and no change to the Recipe file will be necessary. In that case, the
>>> with_ variables should *not* be used only to convey redundant
Jonatan Liljedahl wrote:
> Michael Homer wrote:
> ...
>
>> In most cases, dependencies are autodetected by configure correctly
>> and no change to the Recipe file will be necessary. In that case, the
>> with_ variables should *not* be used only to convey redundant
>> information, and the flag sh
Jonatan Liljedahl wrote:
> Michael Homer wrote:
> ...
>> In most cases, dependencies are autodetected by configure correctly
>> and no change to the Recipe file will be necessary. In that case, the
>> with_ variables should *not* be used only to convey redundant
>> information, and the flag should
Michael Homer wrote:
...
> In most cases, dependencies are autodetected by configure correctly
> and no change to the Recipe file will be necessary. In that case, the
> with_ variables should *not* be used only to convey redundant
> information, and the flag should just be listed appropriately in
>
Hi all,
As promised a few days ago, here's a specification-slash-explanation
of the flags system as it currently stands. There's still a little
time to fix anything you think is broken, but you'll have to be quick.
Flags are lower-case alphanumeric plus underscore, and should be named
after what t
27 matches
Mail list logo
