Dnia 2014-07-28, o godz. 13:02:39 Ian Stakenvicius <a...@gentoo.org> napisał(a):
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA256 > > On 28/07/14 07:21 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > > Dnia 2014-07-25, o godz. 14:49:44 Ian Stakenvicius <a...@gentoo.org> > > napisał(a): > > > >> Hey all.. So, putting aside for now how much of a mess this > >> would be to implement in the virtuals' ebuilds themselves, what > >> do people think of changing the virtuals so that they contain an > >> entry in IUSE for each provider that can satisfy it? > >> > >> The idea here is that the package satisfying a virtual could be > >> optionally explicitly-chosen through package.use (or USE= in > >> make.conf, perhaps) instead of having an entry in @world, that > >> way if nothing depends on the virtual then it and the provider > >> can be - --depclean'ed from the system. The idea is specifically > >> NOT to have rdeps depend on these flags, that would undermine the > >> whole purpose of the virtual; it would just be for end-users to > >> set if they so chose. > > > > I think I don't get this argument. > > > > If you really want to have a particular provider for the virtual > > for external purposes, it's fully purposeful to put it in @world > > or otherwise in a custom set. In this case, USE flags aren't > > helpful. > > The argument I was trying to make is that USE flags would allow > end-users to accomplish the same thing, while not having an entry in > @world and therefore allowing the package to be --depclean'ed if the > virtual is --depcleaned. If you need it externally, you need it not depcleaned, obviously. So you have to have something in @world. If you need a specific implementation, it's more elegant to put that in @world rather than the virtual and playing with USE flags. > > If you only prefer a particular provider, you can tip portage > > easily to use it without resorting to USE flags. This also allows > > portage to semi-transparently switch to other provider if > > dependencies need it. In this case, USE flags only make this > > auto-switching harder. > > That is the other part of this idea, to make auto-switching harder, > because right now portage likes to auto-switch even when it seems like > it shouldn't. This is a bug in portage and should be fixed there. As I said, working it around will only fix it for one package, and it will happen again and again, possibly in cases harder to pinpoint. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
