From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1GCD45-000138-H4 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 13 Aug 2006 10:19:29 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with SMTP id k7DAHSEw021200; Sun, 13 Aug 2006 10:17:28 GMT Received: from buggy.blubb.ch (cable-static-87-245-102-53.shinternet.ch [87.245.102.53]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k7DAHSKq014526 for ; Sun, 13 Aug 2006 10:17:28 GMT Received: from [192.168.10.5] (helo=[192.168.10.5]) by buggy.blubb.ch with esmtp (Exim 4.54) id 1GCElh-0007Er-E0 for gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org; Sun, 13 Aug 2006 14:08:37 +0200 Message-ID: <44DEFC38.1000602@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2006 12:17:28 +0200 From: Simon Stelling User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (X11/20060731) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: Re: recommended USE flags References: <44DC7816.3050203@akyasociados.com.ar> <200608122218.22034.volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> <1155415508.12932.3.camel@scarlatti.leonora.org> <200608122258.35615.volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> In-Reply-To: <200608122258.35615.volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: b0a1e259-25ec-4d14-91c3-ee17143aaf20 X-Archives-Hash: 94e66683860696c90f62db7efbc2cde1 Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote: > On Saturday 12 August 2006 22:45, Vladimir G. Ivanovic wrote: >> On Sat, 2006-08-12 at 22:18 +0200, Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote: >>> so instead of a short but useful hint, which is enough in 95% of cases, >> His point is precisely that it's NOT useful enough. > > for him maybe. I think you misunderstand the entire issue. What's wrong with a more detailed description as an addition to the one we already have in use.desc? > you would still have thousands of descriptions, a lot of them redundand, as a > big pile. There would be NO advantage doing this. Instead of a short > explanation, you would get tons of useless text... There would be an advantage, I just doubt it would be worth the effort because in most cases reading the ebuild will give you a detailed idea about what it does. There are exceptions though, as Duncan pointed out. >>> Are you insane? >> Are you rude? > > yes, maybe? Yes, definitively. You know, you could actually said 'sorry', but that would probably be "insane", right? -- Kind Regards, Simon Stelling Gentoo/AMD64 Developer -- gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list