On Tuesday 31 January 2006 22:39, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Tuesday 31 January 2006 06:31, Jason Stubbs wrote: > > On Monday 30 January 2006 20:54, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > > 1. Because for things like LINGUAS, there are arbitrarily many legal > > > values, and documenting them all and keeping the list up to date would > > > be extremely difficult. > > > > "More precisely, how should they be documented if not via use.desc?" > > considering there's a ton more LINGUAS values than we have USE flags (just > run > `wc` on use.desc and lang.desc), bloating use.desc with LINGUAS settings > benefits *noone* > > we have lang.desc, it is quite populated, what's wrong with having portage > read that
Absolutely nothing. I am in no way suggesting that use.desc is the possible fix. I wasn't even suggesting that each individual flag need be documented. However, if lang.desc already exists (and it does) and can be renamed to linguas.desc, it is probably a better way to manage it than use.desc. Is having INPUT_DEVICES and the like following the same scheme (ie, input_devices.desc) acceptable? -- Jason Stubbs -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
