Re: [gentoo-dev] Rationalizing USE flags by narrowing the scope of them.

2022-01-02 Thread Piotr Karbowski
Hi, On 02/01/2022 01.03, Scott Ellis wrote: Your `ipv6` USE flag hits home - I don't use IPv6, nor do I want to have IPv6 support built into things (just another potential "thing" that I have to secure, or errors/warnings I need to suppress since I run an IPv6-less kernel). If there needs to be

Re: [gentoo-dev] Rationalizing USE flags by narrowing the scope of them.

2022-01-02 Thread Roy Bamford
On 2022.01.02 07:33, Sam James wrote: > [snip] > Note that having USE flags for things, even if forced on/masked (for > the opposite case) is useful for building embedded systems. So, if you > wanted to go this route, a sensible > first step would actually be forcing PAM on. But I don't think PAM

[gentoo-dev] Last rites: sys-auth/pam_blue

2022-01-02 Thread Florian Schmaus
# Florian Schmaus

Re: [gentoo-dev] Rationalizing USE flags by narrowing the scope of them.

2022-01-02 Thread Ionen Wolkens
On Sat, Jan 01, 2022 at 11:21:40PM +0100, Piotr Karbowski wrote: > As example I'd like to use 'ipv6' USE flag, at the moment of writing > this email there's 351 ebuilds in tree that expose ipv6 as USE flag, > allow it to be disabled. This is a flag I've usually been removing when I touch a packa