On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 12:16:18PM +0200, Thomas de Grenier de Latour wrote: > On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 16:40:48 +0200 > Sven Wegener <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > We just had a short discussion over in #gentoo-portage and the > > idea of an use.force file for profiles came up. It allows us to > > force some USE flags to be turned on for a profile. It's not > > possible to disable this flag by make.conf, the environment or > > package.use. But we would not be Gentoo, if we don't leave a > > backdoor. You can disable the flag by putting -flag in /etc/ > > portage/profile/use.force if you really need to. Same goes for > > sub-profiles that need to disable this flag. > > Why a file rather than a make.default variable? I'm thinking of > something like REQUIRED_USE, which would behave just like USE and > friends (the so called "incremental" vars in portage). Its > contents could simply be added to USE after all other steps of > there respective "incrementation" (profiles, make.conf, user > env, etc.). And sure there would also be a REQUIRED_USE_EXPAND > var, similar in purpose to the existing USE_EXPAND but targeting > REQUIRED_USE, where important things like USERLAND or ELIBC could > be moved.
The result is the same. I prefer to use files, because they yield better cvs diff results. Seeing someone change the REQUIRED_USE line involves looking over the complete line to find the changes. We could split the line over multiple lines to make it easier, but then we could just use a flat file. Well we're talking about a couple of flags here, but we don't know what we'll use these REQUIRE_USE for in the future > Well, i'm not saying that vars are better than files though, the > same can be achieved both ways, so it's just another option to > consider. > > (and feel free to replace, in the above, "REQUIRED" by "FORCE", > "IMPORTANT", or any other kind of "DO_NOT_TOUCH"-like prefix) I actually like the required one. Sven -- Sven Wegener Gentoo Linux Developer http://www.gentoo.org/
pgp1ZhcEth1Or.pgp
Description: PGP signature
