On Wednesday 24 August 2005 09:27 pm, Brian Harring wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2005 at 08:50:58PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Wednesday 24 August 2005 08:04 pm, Brian Harring wrote:
> > > Again, returning to the USE="-*" arguement, yes, they can go that
> > > route. It's also kind of a crappy arguement dodging out of the fact
> > > that progressive bloat going into what is effectively a base release
> > > profile, when subprofiles would be better suited.
> >
> > not sure what you mean by 'progressive bloat' ... most of those flags
> > have been there since before i was a dev (so like before the 1.2 release)
> >
> > the default profile has always been a 'desktop' target and really i think
> > that's OK by me
>
> Reasons against sticking a level of indirection in?
> More then willing to assume I've been a tool and missed it, but with
> cascaded profiles there really isn't a good arguement against tagging
> a level in so that anyone after it can just use minimal, or derive a
> server profile off of it.
not quite sure what you're talking about ... the 'USE bloat' only exists in
subprofiles
- base doesnt define any USE
- default-linux defines a few local xorg USE (because no one has given us the
ability to control default USE via IUSE yet :P)
{x86,amd64}/make.defaults has the 'bloated' USE because every single sub x86
and amd64 profile had the same USE in them ... if you want to re-push them
into subprofiles like 200[45].[01], that's fine by me ... will have to check
with wolf/releng so they dont revert it :P
-mike
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
