From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16830 invoked by uid 1002); 2 Jul 2003 02:56:39 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 26250 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2003 02:56:39 -0000 Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 22:56:38 -0400 From: Aron Griffis To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Message-ID: <20030702025637.GH20197@time> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org References: <20030701025824.64ecc18a.seemant@gentoo.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="11Y7aswkeuHtSBEs" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030701025824.64ecc18a.seemant@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Interest Check: Dynamic config files for portage X-Archives-Salt: f13fafc3-27fe-4f38-883c-2283100a7ca6 X-Archives-Hash: 4e7b04f4cd988e8d0b87c4298a2b6350 --11Y7aswkeuHtSBEs Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Seemant, For many of the reasons already mentioned, I don't like this idea. I don't understand the advantage over the current situation. Seemant Kulleen wrote:[Tue Jul 01 2003, 05:58:24AM EDT] > The idea stems from the fact that etc-updating a make.conf file can be > a bit of a stressful event. =20 I think it's more stressful with more files. Furthermore, as somebody already mentioned, this method allows new feature settings to be installed without me knowing about it. I'd rather just merge the large file, see the new settings, etc. > And as portage's set of features grows, > so too will the size of the make.conf file. =20 I don't see how this is a problem, or how splitting it up solves the problem. > I get the impression that > the make.conf file is a little hard to parse, with the huge comment > blocks etc etc. =20 Again, multiple files just makes it harder. Now I get to grep for the setting I want to change before I can actually change it. > This way, the actual make.conf file (which tends to be about 10 lines > of uncommented items in the usual case) can be dynamically generated > from the information in those files. Somebody mentioned that it would be possible to consolidate the comments to make.globals, and leave make.conf uncommented. I think that would be fine. Alternatively, I'd just leave the situation as-is. Aron --11Y7aswkeuHtSBEs Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE/AknlDxcWWTdf66ERAr4PAJ9sjyeOidonocNoSDdOmev0lIaEUgCfb/Aj JxOFqLkrCUHUD0GMESBQ+ro= =jNC7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --11Y7aswkeuHtSBEs--