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 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FonfD-0005mr-4y for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2006 20:33:03 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.6) with SMTP id k59KTawN007497; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 20:29:36 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k59KIPS3030041 for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 20:18:26 GMT Received: from home.wh0rd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37CFF64C9F for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 20:18:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 22091 invoked from network); 9 Jun 2006 16:14:46 -0400 Received: from unknown (HELO vapier) (192.168.0.2) by 192.168.0.1 with SMTP; 9 Jun 2006 16:14:46 -0400 From: Mike Frysinger Organization: wh0rd.org To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] client+server packages - build which one? Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 16:22:25 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 References: <200606091410.51183.uberlord@gentoo.org> <200606091743.40901.uberlord@gentoo.org> <1149879857.22473.82.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> In-Reply-To: <1149879857.22473.82.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> 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; boundary="nextPart1289971.lSL1nkGkDV"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200606091622.25592.vapier@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: a9a8634f-2f08-449d-ab7b-fa4264aef8eb X-Archives-Hash: 0eb9f327687f936b446fd2483ce79be1 --nextPart1289971.lSL1nkGkDV Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-6" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Friday 09 June 2006 15:04, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > On Fri, 2006-06-09 at 17:43 +0100, Roy Marples wrote: > > On Friday 09 June 2006 14:10, Roy Marples wrote: > > > Some packages provide both a client and a server. As such, users > > > usually only want one or the other - and rarely both. > > > > Thanks to wolf31o2 for pointing out that current policy dictates that we > > install both by default and the minimal USE flag should be used to stop > > server only compoment from installing. > > Not policy (I don't think) but current accepted practice. > > Should this become a policy? i dont think it should ... minimal has a very floating definition and varie= s=20 widely based on the package =2Dmike --nextPart1289971.lSL1nkGkDV Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux) iQIVAwUARInYgUFjO5/oN/WBAQLjeRAAwqTGjWaxdppDAdgm/zY5k1sOZ/4/COdu y/ws3C9XABR8DQj7spTgwCgTy5CRvxng2UW2WRH3trTEv305NEn7XUmNm2CKPal/ 0+ANesm0aasOPWQLvGa/5woXgCWdXOKdc7BSPbsDhRUT5Aym2JC3ZnQT1pJPX7XZ SB0z4Ec/DABLvr85CYG0NHuUahLJZou/ZX55fY8hts/JbZRWNmdP3PsO2irSZ29y NDGXd0Q7Har7WPM1dXaCa3OBmLp0k+ZmY0R3pnL1dqoMaGRe5M4UDmHxWAmkBU6q HMVCp0BltX4bRZqusQ69g6QPotV3yfsjFlRcmsiR617lI3MNQqz6aUpYCEfHhcAJ 283H7r201nFBn3pn5cQbAqn0Xfm4yVj+l2qR5FzbCp7JiInYy7dQL8bjMJ4PpzJE rqbhthJ/0mQ+GzwFQySsmB+bAaIBe+MI/pf+YMnt/1Hm3Ba4THKPZhLaWxRFxZxW 0xKDCXQPb55c2Z/PeQsu+B7BGDEQOF8q0RY32yCfOz8nwIlfk8I1hiqOUc1yk+tH CCUZVMyKrjs4XEGnixHOtyVli4hUTf5YPC0tPwx0d7ItgY9CTbXUTaCpM7ITUNj8 XTnEuwyTK3ZOj5GfurQ76b3mcOwdyVV++8rbwcgyNqjHIMO+Rz8Ypo0v6PRN9GUq GT6o3sQC+ZM= =Ywxl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1289971.lSL1nkGkDV-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list