On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 10:37 PM, Enrico Weigelt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Nirbheek Chauhan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
>
>
> > > It's bad, just because Debian does it ?!
> >
> > Yes, because their technical design is different from Gentoo's.
>
> Still too religious ;-P
Of course, that's your opinion to have and keep.
>
> Would be different if you'd said "we don't need to split since we
> have useflags" or "we want to stay as near to upstream as possible"
> instead of "we're not debian". Being different, just to be
> different is really too pubertal for me ;-o
>
The person you were replying to is a Gentoo Council member, elected by
the very devs that run Gentoo. I believe one should try and look
deeper in the meaning of such a man's words before labelling them as
"pubertal".
The words of a veteran usually aren't written in blind emotion or with
prejudice.
>
> > Debian/$binary_distro have to split up packages because they have no
> > other way of mapping configure flags to what the user wants to
> > install. Gentoo does, and they're called USE flags.
>
> Right, binary distros have a much bigger presure on that, but this
> doesn't mean that splitting is always bad.
There are specific use-cases where splitting is good, such as with
gstreamer, gtk-sharp, gnome-python{,-desktop,-extras} which are
essentially dependencies of other packages, and where built_with_use
checks are horrid to use.
> Think of all these useflag-deps, which often wouldn't be necessary
> if the packages would be split in finer granularity.
> Of course, this is mostly the upstream's fault.
I personally have no opinion about the -base and -server split, since
I do not know enough about it. But I am firmly against the -docs split
since the doc USE flag is for this use-case, and I see no reason why
not to use it.
Just stick a USE=doc on -base and be done with it
--
~Nirbheek Chauhan
--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
