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 1Ed9FZ-0002cr-Ob for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 18 Nov 2005 16:38:10 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id jAIGbRvA029653; Fri, 18 Nov 2005 16:37:27 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 jAIGZbwQ025942 for ; Fri, 18 Nov 2005 16:35:37 GMT Received: from zb159056.ppp.dion.ne.jp ([219.125.159.56] helo=opteron246.suzuki-stubbs.home) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.43) id 1Ed9D6-0006wo-Ne for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Fri, 18 Nov 2005 16:35:36 +0000 Received: by opteron246.suzuki-stubbs.home (Postfix, from userid 1000) id CCD722491B5; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 01:37:23 +0900 (JST) From: Jason Stubbs To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] FEATURES=test and the internet Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 01:37:23 +0900 User-Agent: KMail/1.9 References: <46059ce10511161838k11292fc9q428fb3db351dfafb@mail.gmail.com> <200511190053.03748.jstubbs@gentoo.org> <437DFDA7.3050403@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <437DFDA7.3050403@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: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200511190137.23729.jstubbs@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: e402cd21-3f5e-4b47-aa6d-f110235ddf61 X-Archives-Hash: 63f447f8825dce1f5ed4463e92bfbae7 On Saturday 19 November 2005 01:13, Michael Cummings wrote: > Jason Stubbs wrote: > > "Resolved - Fixed"? > > Hmmm, might have been aq epiphany quirk (wouldn't be the first) - when i > looked there was no comment indicated. Nope. I wrote ".". Bugs wrote the above for me. ;) > > The last discussion that was had ended up with a TDEPEND, but that > > doesn't cover the additional SRC_URI requirements. Besides SRC_URI, are > > there any other requirements that might sneak in later on? > > and this is the other reason i took it off -dev - so i don't sound like > an idiot -there's a TPDEPEND now?? That would 100% cover my needs, since > these are testing depends. A TDEPEND? Nope, not yet. It's just a possible solution that won't require overloading USE flags for internal purposes further. > > Nah, let's get it in the open (again) and get it dealt with. > > OK, so i violated that, but now i'm wondering if my needs are already > covered (hey, could happen) :) Not just yet... -- Jason Stubbs -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list