From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8301 invoked by uid 1002); 6 Sep 2003 23:49:01 -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 32271 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2003 23:49:01 -0000 From: Steven Elling To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 18:48:54 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.2 References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200309061848.54494.ellings@kcnet.com> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Some suggestions X-Archives-Salt: 98c3c886-6ed2-4d12-81ca-ebb4f85fab2d X-Archives-Hash: 8d1d0e32d18c04d09b56a41366343fa1 On Saturday 06 September 2003 13:05, David Sankel wrote: > 2) make.conf updates to be more automated > > Most gentoo users, I believe, modify this file. This specific file > changes quite often with updates. Since most users only modify the "USE" > and "CFLAGS" components, having an update that is automatic is plausible. > This feature is a trade off between the integrity and consistency of the > system verses end-user maintenance time. Requiring portage updates to make.conf at all has always bugged me. The file is meant to contain custom settings for portage and to append to or override variables in make.globals and the defaults. It should not hold all the documentation for make.conf. It should not hold all the defaults... that's what make.globals and the defaults are for. Why is all the documentation on make.conf in make.conf anyway? Shouldn't it be in make.globals or better yet the man page? make.conf is used for system customization and, as such, portage should leave it alone. When portage is installed on the drive for the first time it should not create make.conf. Portage should leave it up to the admin/user of the box to create the file. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list