On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 13:05:09 -0700 Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| On Sun, Oct 15, 2006 at 08:37:48PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 12:27:20 -0700 Brian Harring
| > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > | Ebuilds already have a boatload of duplication;
| > 
| > They have no duplication related to whether a USE flag is enabled.
| 
| ...Because until up until now, THEY DIDN'T SPECIFY IF A USE FLAG WAS 
| ENABLED.

Which is exactly my point.

| It's a stupid statement, not providing any further backing for your 
| position; please dear god spare us all the waste of time reading 
| your emails if that's how you're going to push for what you want...

Not at all. Your argument could be rephrased like this: There are
already lots of people dying in Africa, so it's ok to poison their food
supply.

| > It's not a question of space. It's a question of maintainability.
| 
| Your proposal is using profiles.  Ok, so for any overlay that is
| going to use default IUSE, they now have to bundle their own profile
| (and maintain said profile).
| 
| Further, since portage (the official manager) supports *one*, and
| only *one* profile, the user has to specify their own high level
| profile pulling in their desired profile, and intermixing all base
| profiles from their overlays.  This is regardless of whether that
| default use flag is applicable to *all* repos, like it or not, it's
| forced on via your proposal.

Which is why I suggested changing Portage's behaviour earlier in the
thread. Like it or not, overlays are already getting complex enough
that they'd benefit from profile behaviour.

| Nearest I can figure, you're pressing hard for the view that all USE 
| flags must come from profiles (by extension user configuration); 

Yup. Default USE flags are profile dependent data. The sensible default
value varies depending upon conditions like arch and system role.

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh
Mail                : ciaranm at ciaranm.org
Web                 : http://ciaranm.org/
as-needed is broken : http://ciaranm.org/show_post.pl?post_id=13

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to