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 1EIhgI-0002nY-0H for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 23 Sep 2005 07:09:14 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id j8N72HsG002354; Fri, 23 Sep 2005 07:02:17 GMT Received: from caine.easynet.fr (smarthost165.mail.easynet.fr [212.180.1.165]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id j8N70Uoh012022 for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2005 07:00:30 GMT Received: from easyconnect2121138-64.clients.easynet.fr ([212.11.38.64] helo=eusebe) by caine.easynet.fr with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1EIhdu-0001yf-Fx for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Fri, 23 Sep 2005 09:06:46 +0200 Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2005 09:06:00 +0200 From: Thomas de Grenier de Latour To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: Two-level USE-flag system VAR: [gentoo-dev] USE="minimal" for kernel sources Message-ID: <20050923090600.56122c71@eusebe> In-Reply-To: <1127420915.23254.24.camel@login.blenning.no> References: <431C97C4.3070406@gentoo.org> <1126203005.5845.81.camel@alto> <200509082017.33985@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org> <1126206101.9553.5.camel@localhost> <1127338088.3238.36.camel@login.blenning.no> <4331D9A9.9090205@egr.msu.edu> <1127420915.23254.24.camel@login.blenning.no> Organization: Fasmz X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 1.9.14 (GTK+ 2.8.3; i686-pc-linux-gnu) 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: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: fc288a8a-7f5e-423c-83d4-1aded329f157 X-Archives-Hash: 2476c55496a570c9c00d46e2aa8e0078 On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 22:28:35 +0200 Tom Fredrik Blenning Klaussen wrote: > Now as for the USE flag system. It has actually become so big > that it's difficult to use it effectively. I would actually > suggest that a two level system of USE flags could be employed. > Something like > wtk/gtk (Windowing Toolkit / gtk) > wtk/kde (Windowing Toolkit / kde) Sounds good on this example, but i'm not sure it would be that easy and meaningfull on the whole use.desc. I think you would end up with lot of "this flag should be in that category and not in this one" discussions (what already happen with packages). Also, i would be curious to see the output of an "emerge -pv" on some highly configurable packages (dev-lang/php comes to mind for instance), and whether it really improves readibility. > There could also be another category > experimental/minimal If the idea is just to give a "don't use this flag but if you know what you are doing" warning, then the best imho is simply to use.mask it in base profile. And people who know what they are doing can unmask it from their /etc/portage/profile/use.mask (syntax is "-flag"). Sure, it should not be named "minimal" in that case, since "minimal" is not something you want to mask, but rather "mini-kernel-src" or anything else that sounds like a specific flag. -- TGL. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list