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 1Fommc-0006H1-GS for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2006 19:36:38 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.6) with SMTP id k59JWcqW016430; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 19:32:38 GMT Received: from mail.marples.name (rsm.demon.co.uk [80.177.111.50]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k59JRVYq002124 for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 19:27:31 GMT Received: from uberpc.marples.name (uberpc.marples.name [10.73.1.30]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.marples.name (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D34B190034 for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 20:27:29 +0100 (BST) From: Roy Marples To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] client+server packages - build which one? Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 20:27:28 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.3 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> Organization: Gentoo 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: <200606092027.28354.uberlord@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: c5fa12f9-3c8e-4287-95d7-96c2a556c3ca X-Archives-Hash: ad77003ed7e6a91e83531da897905826 On Friday 09 June 2006 20:04, 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 think so, as many packages provide such a split and it would make choosing flags a little easier :) -- Roy Marples Gentoo/Linux Developer (baselayout, networking) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list