Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal for advanced useflag-syntax

[Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1828 bytes --]

On Monday 07 August 2006 15:16, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> * Luca Barbato <lu_zero@gentoo.org> schrieb:
>
> <snip>
>
> > > For example: mplayer
> > > It has it's gui-less player and an gtk-based frontend in one package.
> > > We should split this into two packages: mplayer and gmplayer.
> > > The chances to get this done in the upstream *before* some major
> > > distro like gentoo does the split by its own are quite low.
> >
> > We do not split packages for frivolous reasons.
>
> Well, I don't consider reducing complexity "frivolous" ;-o

Which reduction for which complexity? Do you want to bring everyone's systems 
to a grinding halt, just because you can't understand the "complexity" of 
useflags. Useflags are one of the distinguishing features of gentoo. Now you 
opt to do away with them. I do not see the reason. It is also against the 
gentoo philosophy of offering software the way upstream provides it.

>
> <snip>
>
> > > Some
> > > people @mplayerhq are quite aeh, unfortunate, about changes in the
> > > build procedure. Maybe you like to have a look at the discussion
> > > about my patches introducing pkg-config utilization.

pkg-config is a broken concept. Libraries themselves should state dependency 
information. Pkg-config is a "solution" that introduces at least as many 
problems as it solves. Only libtool (esp. old versions) is worse in it's 
incomplete use of the linker and the way it encourages broken library 
linking.

> That's the right ways. And so gmplayer stuff should be dropped
> completely. If you like, I'll sit down and fix the ebuilds.

First fix your attitude problem, then come with good suggestions stated in a 
more friendly way.

Paul

-- 
Paul de Vrieze
Gentoo Developer
Mail: pauldv@gentoo.org
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 200 bytes --]