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 1EgO7I-0007Vc-R7 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 27 Nov 2005 15:07:01 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id jARF5kZE017225; Sun, 27 Nov 2005 15:05:46 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 jARF3a1J001679 for ; Sun, 27 Nov 2005 15:03:36 GMT Received: from zj031127.ppp.dion.ne.jp ([222.4.31.127] helo=opteron246.suzuki-stubbs.home) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.43) id 1EgO40-0006rl-AF for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Sun, 27 Nov 2005 15:03:36 +0000 Received: by opteron246.suzuki-stubbs.home (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 43C03248622; Mon, 28 Nov 2005 00:05:53 +0900 (JST) From: Jason Stubbs To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] manpages that requires dependencies Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 00:05:53 +0900 User-Agent: KMail/1.9 References: <200511250049.50833@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org> <200511272339.48235.jstubbs@gentoo.org> <1978078361.20051127154338@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <1978078361.20051127154338@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="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200511280005.53197.jstubbs@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: a6196529-8cb6-43e7-bf8e-829a770f5805 X-Archives-Hash: 141ae1531482f624a67cfbec4630522d On Sunday 27 November 2005 23:43, Jakub Moc wrote: > 27.11.2005, 15:39:48, Jason Stubbs wrote: > > On Sunday 27 November 2005 22:09, Ned Ludd wrote: > >> On Sun, 2005-11-27 at 07:58 -0500, Ned Ludd wrote: > >> > On Fri, 2005-11-25 at 12:46 +0200, Marius Mauch wrote: > >> > > Except that no{man,info,doc} are on the to-die list anyway. > >> > > >> > They are very valuable features and quite easy to use without mucking > >> > with INSTALL_MASK. I'm against this change without some justification. > >> > >> further investigation shows that you can't simply get rid of these as > >> several core ebuilds use the feature to control the creation of > >> packages. A quick grep shows that several ebuilds do stuff like. > >> has noman FEATURES && do_stuff > >> > >> openssl/glibc/gcc/dhcp/boa/gdb to name a few that take advantage of the > >> no{man,info,doc} FEATURES= already. > > > > Core packages or not, they are all broken. When the requirement came up, > > the respective maintainers should have spoken up so that a proper > > solution could be found. When are the quick hacks going to stop? :| > > I can't see why exactly do we need to get rid of useful features? :-( Nobody said anything about getting rid of the features. The only thing that has been stated is that FEATURES="noman" cannot be relied upon to mean that portage won't install man pages or vice-versa. There are three possibilities that I can see: 1) FEATURES="noman" becomes FEATURES="man" 2) FEATURES="noman" is dropped in favour of INSTALL_MASK="/usr/share/man" 3) FEATURES="noman" is dropped in favour of USE="man" or USE="manpages" In light of the above requirements and the fact that dyn_* will likely be moved into the tree down the track, #3 seems to be the best in my mind. Similarly, it would solve the previously discussed problems related to FEATURES="test". -- Jason Stubbs -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list