On Tuesday 09 December 2003 05:56, Luke-Jr wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Monday 08 December 2003 08:34 pm, Jeremy Maitin-Shepard wrote:
> > It is not totally unrelated per se, because I believe that the USE
flag
> > system was initially designed with the idea that the same USE
flags
> > would be used for most or all packages. If per-package USE flag
> > documentation is needed, it clearly indicates that the same flags
are
> > not to be used for all packages. Thus, it is clear that there is
a
> > need for per-package use flag specification.
>
> I think that, ideally, we should have many very specific per- package
USE
> flags and have group them into aliases at different levels, the
vaguest
> level being something such as "desktop" or "server" followed by
things like
> "gui", "scanning" and similar. This would allow someone to, for
example,
> set their USE="desktop -gui" if they want a console desktop system
or
> USE="server gui - -qt" if they want a server with a GUI, but not
using Qt
> if another toolkit is available.
> It'd probably be very difficult to implement this, though,
especially in
> the current portage.
You hit the nail on the head. I wasn't in fact talking about per-package USE flags in my original post, but the same idea that you just mentioned has occurred to me before. I shelved in the back of brain and forgot it was there...
Will post the idea on -portage-dev.
What about USE-flags that change dependencies and those that don't. Flags that just relates to one package (ex. moznomail) and flags that relates to system functionality (ex. nls, pam). Flags that depends on other flags. The whole system probably needs to be redesigned.
I think that the settings in make.conf should only be those that relates to the whole system. All flags that relates to just one ebuild or, like java, have diffrent meanings for all ebuild should be removed from make.conf.
/John
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
