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 4.50) id 1ESmdZ-0006sA-U5 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 21 Oct 2005 02:28:06 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id j9L2Oig6017383; Fri, 21 Oct 2005 02:24:44 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id j9L2LtG8004035 for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2005 02:21:55 GMT Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=home.wh0rd.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ESmaB-0003ZM-7K for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Fri, 21 Oct 2005 02:24:35 +0000 Received: (qmail 3554 invoked from network); 20 Oct 2005 22:23:14 -0400 Received: from unknown (HELO vapier) (192.168.0.2) by 192.168.0.1 with SMTP; 20 Oct 2005 22:23:14 -0400 From: Mike Frysinger Organization: wh0rd.org To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] ${PORTDIR}/profiles/package.use Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 22:26:58 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.3 References: <43581061.5090102@gentoo.org> <200510202216.54195.vapier@gentoo.org> <36596.127.0.0.1.1129861153.squirrel@cornholio> In-Reply-To: <36596.127.0.0.1.1129861153.squirrel@cornholio> 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="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200510202226.58360.vapier@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 52c9a9fc-189d-4d6d-8fbc-cfff9d18f6d9 X-Archives-Hash: a6eef8a53b90daa74e5427099e8584e7 On Thursday 20 October 2005 10:19 pm, Dave Nebinger wrote: > >> > i still dont see how this addresses the nocxx / USE=-* > >> > >> noFOO is used because "FOO" is on by default, and noFOO turns it off. > >> AutoUSE is the same way, package bar is included in the buildplan and to > >> have sane defaults, certain flags are turned on. > > > > that was a great explanation however irrelevant it may have been > > > > i guess we will have to make 'nocxx' a special case as we strip all other > > 'no*' USE flags from portage > > Sorry, guys, but isn't that what "-FOO" is supposed to be for? If we > already have support for "-FOO", why then do we need a "noFOO" also? > > Or is there some distinction I'm missing here? you're missing the fact that if we change 'nocxx' to 'cxx' then everyone who uses '-*' in their USE flags will emerge their gcc without C++ support -mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list