Re: [gentoo-dev] revdep-rebuild bikeshedding

2013-01-17 Thread Sergey Popov
17.01.2013 00:43, Paul Varner wrote: > Here is where the bikeshedding begins: > 1. What variable name do we prefer? REVDEP_DEFAULT_OPTS or > REVDEP_EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS REVDEP_REBUILD_DEFAULT_OPTS seems fine, IMO. > 2. What behavior do we want? append to EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS or replace > EMERGE_DEF

Re: [gentoo-dev] revdep-rebuild bikeshedding

2013-01-16 Thread Albert Hopkins
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013, at 03:57 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: [...] > +1 on the replace. +1

Re: [gentoo-dev] revdep-rebuild bikeshedding

2013-01-16 Thread Ian Stakenvicius
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 16/01/13 03:43 PM, Paul Varner wrote: > All: > > Time for some bikeshedding :) > > For the gentoolkit-0.3.0 series, I removed any filtering of emerge > options set in EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPS for revdep-rebuild. This has > caused some people to comp

Re: [gentoo-dev] revdep-rebuild bikeshedding

2013-01-16 Thread Rich Freeman
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Paul Varner wrote: > 2. What behavior do we want? append to EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS or replace > EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS Replace is probably better. You can always manually append if you want to, but it is much harder to remove unless portage has logic to handle a invers

[gentoo-dev] revdep-rebuild bikeshedding

2013-01-16 Thread Paul Varner
All: Time for some bikeshedding :) For the gentoolkit-0.3.0 series, I removed any filtering of emerge options set in EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPS for revdep-rebuild. This has caused some people to complain because some of the flags in their EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS are not suitable for a revdep-rebuild run. I