On Tuesday 18 January 2005 09:22, Stuart Longland wrote:
> Luke-Jr wrote:
> > On Tuesday 18 January 2005 5:45 am, Stuart Longland wrote:
> >> Personally, I'd much rather keep the monolithic packages as the KDE
> >>developers intended.
> >
> > Reminder: KDE's semi-official view is that the CVS modules (kdebase,
> > kdenetwork, etc) *should* be split into many individual packages.
>
> Yeah, so I've noticed from what others have mentioned.  But when you
> download the source from their site, it's still just large lumps.
> (kdelibs, kdebase...etc)  To split this up, would mean the package
> maintainers having to download each tarball and split it up -- a major
> headache IMHO that can be avoided.
Nonsense. It'd take me all of ten minutes. We spend many hours every minor 
release (eg 3.4) testing and writing ebuilds. Splitting them with a script to 
have a separate tarball for every subdir is trivial.

> Well, I was thinking of having something like the USE flags.  I've got
> no experience with the DO_NOT_COMPILE envvar myself (never had to use
> it) but by the sounds of things, that would be a cleaner method.
>
> Presumably with my suggestion there, you might have the default set for
> all packages... but suppose on some imaginary arch -- kdm caused major
> problems -- they could set KDE_PKG='-kdm' in the profile, thus disabling
> kdm.  My suggestion there wasn't a complete solution to the problem --
> just a bit of brainstorming. :-)

Local USE flags (_not_ a KDE_PKG variable) is better than DO_NOT_COMPILE 
because portage will track the flags for you, but it still doesn't solve the  
core issues with DO_NOT_COMPILE:
- No dependencies on having a USE flag enabled, or between two USE flags
- No way to add or remove an app (ie a USE flag) without recompiling all the 
other apps in the package every time
- No way to create per-app binary packages

-- 
Dan Armak
Gentoo Linux developer (KDE)
Public GPG key: http://dev.gentoo.org/~danarmak/danarmak-gpg-public.key
Fingerprint: DD70 DBF9 E3D4 6CB9 2FDD  0069 508D 9143 8D5F 8951

Attachment: pgprzITvdhOtB.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to