On Fri, Jul 07, 2006 at 07:50:27PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Friday 07 July 2006 19:04, Harald van Dijk wrote: > > I hope this is specific enough: toolchain.eclass revision 1.234 > > (separating ssp/... from vanilla) log message: > > "ssp/pie/htb have their own USE flags sep from vanilla, so people can > > utilize those" > > when in fact the old USE=vanilla behaviour is unavailable now. You have > > never (as far as I know) answered whether it was intended to keep the > > old behaviour as an option, and if it wasn't, why the log message is > > what it is. > > well i cant answer it if you havent asked it ... me not answering you on irc > when i'm not around does not constitute being ignored and anyone who relies > on irc in this respect really needs to learn more about irc
I also mentioned it in a bugzilla comment, though admittedly not as a question there. (The gcc 2 bug, I think.) Bugzilla comments are safe to assume read, right? > the log message looks pretty clear to me, i dont see this "hidden message" > you're referring to > > the ssp/pie/htb patches have their own USE flags so separating them from > USE=vanilla makes perfect sense ... I'm not disagreeing with that, but removing an older option is not just providing more choices. > now you can do: > gentoo patches + ssp > gentoo patches + nossp > vanilla + ssp > vanilla + nossp gentoo patches + ssp gentoo patches + stub vanilla + ssp vanilla + stub > whereas before you only had the option of: > gentoo patches + ssp > vanilla + nossp gentoo patches + ssp gentoo patches + stub vanilla > like i said in my previous e-mail, forcing stubs onto people even when > USE=vanilla *is by design* because i got tired of people who had no clue > about the consequences throwing USE=vanilla into their USE in make.conf and > then complaining when the lack of SSP broke things ... But I'm not asking for USE="vanilla" to disable SSP completely, I'm only asking for USE="vanilla nossp" to disable it. "nossp" is already explicitly documented as "NOT FOR GENERAL USE", too. > this is also the > reason i havent added USE=vanilla to glibc, too many users would simply break > their boxes No complaints there. :) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
