Dnia 2015-03-29, o godz. 19:14:43 Nikos Chantziaras <rea...@gmail.com> napisał(a):
> On 17/03/15 18:29, Michał Górny wrote: > > Dnia 2015-03-17, o godz. 16:55:32 > > René Neumann <li...@necoro.eu> napisał(a): > > > >> Am 17.03.2015 um 16:33 schrieb Michał Górny: > >>> However, some > >>> users may prefer setting ABI_X86 globally to enable 32-bit libraries > >>> in all packages that support building them. This can be done using > >>> the following package.use entry: > >>> > >>> */* abi_x86_32 > >>> > >> > >> I'm confused: Has this a different semantics from adding > >> USE+='abi_x86_32' to make.conf? If no, why mention this strange way > >> (which is new to me) for setting default global useflags. > > > > Because this is how users learn new fun stuff. Like sane configuration. > > I don't see why ABI_X86 is not the sane option. Using wildcards in > package.use is what sounds insane to me. Because it overrides the defaults without providing a way to append to them. > Are you suggesting that the sane way of setting USE flags globally is > moving them from make.conf into package.use and use wildcards to set > them globally? Yes. > >> And to bring this even further: Wouldn't the nicest approach to add > >> ABI_X86="32" > > > > This will disable some 64-bit web browser plugins. > > I don't see why the package.use wildcard wouldn't do that too. It is applied on top of the default rather than overriding it. > >> ABI_X86="32 64" > >> to make.conf? (With the latter being more descriptive, as the first one > >> might suggest that _only_ 32bit should be built). > > > > This will enable some possibly-unwanted 64-bit software, e.g. 64-bit > > Windows support in wine. > > I don't see why the package.use wildcard wouldn't do that too. Ditto. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
pgpMbkABIYH83.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
