From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org)
	by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <gentoo-dev+bounces-38334-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
	id 1N5lVD-0006lg-6P
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 04 Nov 2009 19:26:43 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AB1ACE0BAF;
	Wed,  4 Nov 2009 19:26:41 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87DE5E0BAF
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed,  4 Nov 2009 19:26:41 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [192.168.1.35] (unknown [77.246.104.171])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA31F676BF
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed,  4 Nov 2009 19:26:38 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] client/server consistency: USE flags / split
 packages
From: Peter Volkov <pva@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
In-Reply-To: <1257352489.6780.433.camel@localhost>
References: <1257349497.20584.2085.camel@tablet>
	 <1257352489.6780.433.camel@localhost>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2009 22:25:41 +0300
Message-ID: <1257362741.20584.2322.camel@tablet>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.1 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Archives-Salt: 877eca43-c84e-4ae6-9d4a-97b2e853d2ac
X-Archives-Hash: d258fdce5167fa6f45f5d9c3c33f13a7

=D0=92 =D0=A1=D1=80=D0=B4, 04/11/2009 =D0=B2 17:34 +0100, Tiziano M=C3=BC=
ller =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=88=D0=B5=D1=82:
> Am Mittwoch, den 04.11.2009, 18:44 +0300 schrieb Peter Volkov:
> > So are there any good reasons to split packages?
>=20
> In environments with a staging server and binary packages, yes.

Currently you either have to script your staging server correctly (play
with PKGDIR) or use different build hosts for different configurations.
In any way, this does not justify pushing USE flags into package names.

--=20
Peter.