On Thursday 20 October 2005 10:47 pm, Alec Warner wrote: > Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On Thursday 20 October 2005 10:03 pm, Alec Warner wrote: > >>Mike Frysinger wrote: > >>>On Thursday 20 October 2005 05:47 pm, Petteri Räty wrote: > >>>>Every once in a while I see people wanting to use nosomething use > >>>> flags. Why don't we have a package.use like we already have a > >>>> package.mask file? This would make it possible for developers to turn > >>>> on use flags by default in a way that would not cruft the base > >>>> profiles for every local use flag. > >>> > >>>i still dont see how this addresses the nocxx / USE=-* > >> > >>noFOO is used because "FOO" is on by default, and noFOO turns it off. > >>AutoUSE is the same way, package bar is included in the buildplan and to > >>have sane defaults, certain flags are turned on. > >><snip> > > > > that was a great explanation however irrelevant it may have been > > > > i guess we will have to make 'nocxx' a special case as we strip all other > > 'no*' USE flags from portage > > And we should keep the current shitty behavior to accomediate cxx why? > What is so hard about USE="-* cxx"? Are there no other flags that do > bad things when they aren't turned on via use.defaults and profiles?
i only said keep nocxx there is nothing hard about USE="-* cxx" but while most here want to say 'fuck the users' (and i'm inclined to agree), i'd rather not field those bugs/questions/etc... -mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
