Mike Frysinger posted on Sun, 20 Nov 2011 01:42:43 -0500 as excerpted: > we've got pretty good USE=readline coverage now, and there's nothing > this provides in terms of utility programs that means we need this to be > explicitly listed in the profile as a system package. so time to drop > it.
Um... package, or USE flag? You mention the USE flag but then say the package, but don't mention the category in either the subject or body, which again tilts toward the USE flag as it's bare, while the package normally comes with a category, particularly given that there are two such packages in the tree so the package name alone is ambiguous. But since there's two packages and a USE flag and there's reasons to argue one way but you specifically said the other, which is ambiguous on its own, it's doubly ambiguous! -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
