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 4.43) id 1E65VM-000822-AF for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 19 Aug 2005 11:57:48 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j7JBuZdQ029691; Fri, 19 Aug 2005 11:56:35 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j7JBs7tB017563 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2005 11:54:08 GMT Received: from cpe-65-26-255-237.wi.res.rr.com ([65.26.255.237] helo=nightcrawler) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.43) id 1E65Rw-0006yk-7z for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Fri, 19 Aug 2005 11:54:16 +0000 Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:53:43 -0500 From: Brian Harring To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Local USE defaults Message-ID: <20050819115343.GJ19947@nightcrawler> References: <200508181628.44059.trapni@gentoo.org> <4304B293.4030305@gentoo.org> <20050818163151.GC19947@nightcrawler> <200508181318.17495.vapier@gentoo.org> <20050818173821.GE19947@nightcrawler> <430585F4.40008@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="rmUrFcWP4LYae1gV" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <430585F4.40008@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-Archives-Salt: 469a27c7-bb4a-4028-a229-754a43a4f2e0 X-Archives-Hash: 3d11585101a2685c73f38cfabb77e2d2 --rmUrFcWP4LYae1gV Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 12:10:44AM -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote: > Brian Harring wrote: > | Yeah, but the angle I'm pushing for default IUSE's ...er.. use is > | eliminating no* flags, and giving ebuild maintainers more flexibility > | in breaking the package down into conditionals. > | > | I really don't see -* being all that useful long term frankly, since > | the major usage of it I've seen is either within cascaded profiles, or > | nuking autouse; people do block profile use flags also, but killing > | autouse falls in with killing profiles :) >=20 > I don't think that having -* not actually do -* is a good idea. And most > people adding local flags don't really consider the -* case so creating > no* flags isn't a major concern. >=20 > ~From my POV, -* is expected to not work well, but it should do what it > suggests: subtract everything. Meh. -* 's meaning right now is to nuke all USE flags that portage tries to=20 'help' in adding. Having it nuke all default use seems wrong, since=20 people *currently* use -* to block autouse crap, and -* isn't what=20 they signed up for initially. Different flag imo seems wise, rather then grandfathering people into=20 it; nuking what the profile offers should be available, but I don't=20 think nuking default IUSE should be nuked as an added bonus of trying=20 to disable auto-use/profile cruft. Thoughts? ~harring --rmUrFcWP4LYae1gV Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDBchGvdBxRoA3VU0RAtZlAJ9Hpx3tGcMTCZ3JzSQPIfFbwX1izwCfevS7 q3tNHsRwARp3Jzak4K5pR90= =VjJL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --rmUrFcWP4LYae1gV-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list