On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Rafael Goncalves Martins <rafaelmart...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 11:46 AM, Thomas Sachau <to...@gentoo.org> wrote: >> Am 29.10.2010 14:13, schrieb Petteri Räty: >>> On 29.10.2010 15.02, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>> 2) Furthermore I would like to drop the following use flags from default >>>>> IUSE >>>> >>>>> -apache2 >>>>> -ldap >>>> >>>>> A minimal server installation does requires neither apache2 nor ldap >>>> >>>> Although one can install a server without apache or ldap, I'd say the >>>> server profile seems the natural choice to have them enabled. >>>> If we had the statistics for it, we could check how many people have >>>> apache installed with that profile vs not having it. As there's nothing >>>> preventing one from having USE="-apache2 -ldap" when required and I >>>> don't use the server profiles, I don't really have a strong opinion >>>> about this. >>>> >>> >>> And enabling a use flag should be question of is it wanted when a >>> package actually support those flags. On a server when you are >>> installing a package with a apache use flag it's certainly possible to >>> you would like to have it enabled more often than not. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Petteri >>> >>> >> >> Which raises the question, if those people, who want to install a minimal >> server will mostly use >> apache or something different. And especially for minimal setups, i dont >> think that apache will be >> the first choice, so i agree with the removal of those USE flags from >> default IUSE. >> The profile is intended to have a minimal set of flags, i would call apache >> an additional optional >> flag, not a default option for minimal server setups. >> > > Totally agreed! > > Best regards. > > -- > Rafael Goncalves Martins > Gentoo Linux developer > http://rafaelmartins.eng.br/ > >
I use the server profile and I would also like a minimal set of use flags. I don't think you need to force sysadmins, that know what they want, to have those flags. Regards, Kfir
