Re: [gentoo-dev] dedicated USE-flag is inconsequent and confusing
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Albert Zeyer wrote:
| Hi!
[snip]
| So, what do you think?
I think it makes no sense to have a no-server no-gui option, so this just
doesn't map
cleanly to our binary use flag system.
Marijn
- --
Marijn Schouten (hkBst), Gentoo Lisp project, Gentoo ML
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/, #gentoo-{lisp,ml} on FreeNode
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iEYEARECAAYFAkgsE+4ACgkQp/VmCx0OL2x4qACfRIJWzYc6oSswKzWCqxNLa5cp
46cAoKz672K5fmmaQMSw6HCpzDLB+AvT
=CiF4
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] dedicated USE-flag is inconsequent and confusing
I think it should be made consistent or it should be turned into a local use flag. no-* or *-only flag don't make sense in my opinion, because you can get the same with: -gui instead of nogui (maybe -gtk/-qt4/-kde or something would be even better) -* server instead of server-only (sure, this can only be done for each single package, but it looks cleaner to me than -only) Benedikt -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] dedicated USE-flag is inconsequent and confusing
On Thu, 2008-05-15 at 15:42 +0200, Benedikt Morbach wrote: I think it should be made consistent or it should be turned into a local use flag. no-* or *-only flag don't make sense in my opinion, because you can get the same with: -gui instead of nogui (maybe -gtk/-qt4/-kde or something would be even better) -* server instead of server-only (sure, this can only be done for each single package, but it looks cleaner to me than -only) Benedikt Some packages also have the X USE-flag. Though this USE-flag is often used to enable linking against X; disabling doesn't mean to remove the GUI (it's often for games or libs like libsdl which have alternative gfx output like aalib, framebuffer, etc.). There is also already a guionly and a client-only USE-flag. But I don't think this is a good USE-flag for games because it's somehow confusing then if you want to have only the dedicated server and not the GUI. I also don't like no* USE-flags that much. But there are already a lot available. I thought they were introduced because it's most probable that you want to have the specific support and if not, you have to specify this explicitly. I think the server USE-flag is a good USE-flag to enable/disable the support of a dedicated server of a specific game. This USE-flag is intuitivly clear. The GUI would not depend on the server USE-flag. For the GUI, perhaps the USE-flag client would be good. -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Spring clean package.mask, please.
If you have a entry in package.mask for removal, please do so now. If you want treecleaners to handle it, please state so. Already cleaned up quite a bit today, and yeah.. it will surely look bad in GMN ;-) Thanks, Samuli -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Spring clean package.mask, please.
Samuli Suominen wrote: If you have a entry in package.mask for removal, please do so now. If you want treecleaners to handle it, please state so. Already cleaned up quite a bit today, and yeah.. it will surely look bad in GMN ;-) I'd propose to update dev-python/visual to the current beta (beta26) and remove it from package.mask: # Colin Kingsley [EMAIL PROTECTED] (24 Jun 2006) # Masked for testing It works fine. The ebuild is in the science overlay (essentially the same as _beta0 in the main tree, with minor cleanups). Andrey -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Special meeting [WAS: Council meeting summary for 8 May 2008]
On 16:33 Thu 08 May , Donnie Berkholz wrote: Enforced retirement: After 2.5 hours on the previous topics, people had to go to sleep and jokey's computer broke. Instead of waiting till the next regular meeting, because of its urgency, we scheduled a special session next week at the same time. The appeals will *not* be decided then -- it's about figuring out the validity and the process. Only 2 council members showed up: amne and me. There's some discussion over whether GLEP 39 requires that we reelect a new council because of this, and what to do now. It's happening over on the gentoo-project mailing list. Subscribe there to join in by sending an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Feel free to catch up on the discussion so far, which started at http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/msg_0b435377d3b7a23a0729f23a17701c1f.xml Please head over to the gentoo-project list if you have something to say, instead of responding to this email. This kind of topic is exactly why we split it off from -dev. Thanks, Donnie -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] last rites for net-dialup/{mclient,mserver,linesrv,xlc}
Packages in $subj will be removed in 30 days because: - upstream is dead (for years in the case of the first 2 packages) - I don't think they have even one gentoo user (who would be crazy enough to install gentoo while using a dialup connection?) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: dedicated USE-flag is inconsequent and confusing
Albert Zeyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Thu, 15 May 2008 16:24:10 +0200: I also don't like no* USE-flags that much. But there are already a lot available. I thought they were introduced because it's most probable that you want to have the specific support and if not, you have to specify this explicitly. The no* USE flags are deprecated and headed toward legacy-only, due to portage support of USE defaults being so new and there being no way to default to on, for those packages where it made the most sense, previously. However, AFAIK USE defaults are an EAPI=1 feature, and thus not quite yet encouraged for the general tree. That said, new versions of many packages with no* USE flags have them removed in favor of USE defaults. When EAPI=1 portage and the newer USE defaults versions of these packages have been stable for a period and as the by then legacy versions fade out, positive based USE defaults will ultimately replace most or all of the current no* flags. All as I understand it as not-a-dev-but-a-regular-dev-list-reader. -- 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 -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
