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 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1H1Vnf-0001pA-0Y for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 01 Jan 2007 22:38:35 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id l01MbdE9016220; Mon, 1 Jan 2007 22:37:39 GMT Received: from ppsw-7.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw-7.csi.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.137]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l01MZihM029878 for ; Mon, 1 Jan 2007 22:35:44 GMT X-Cam-SpamDetails: Not scanned X-Cam-AntiVirus: No virus found X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://www.cam.ac.uk/cs/email/scanner/ Received: from cpc4-cmbg1-0-0-cust9.cmbg.cable.ntl.com ([82.21.108.10]:59311 helo=maya) by ppsw-7.csi.cam.ac.uk (smtp.hermes.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.157]:25) with esmtpsa (LOGIN:spb42) (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) id 1H1Vkr-00016u-OB (Exim 4.63) for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org (return-path ); Mon, 01 Jan 2007 22:35:42 +0000 Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2007 22:49:49 +0000 From: Stephen Bennett To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: making USE_EXPANDed variables incremental Message-ID: <20070101224949.23e52440@maya> In-Reply-To: <45997C21.4000001@gentoo.org> References: <20070101211247.730788c9@maya> <45997C21.4000001@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 2.6.1 (GTK+ 2.10.6; i686-pc-linux-gnu) 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=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "S.P. Bennett" X-Archives-Salt: e2e180df-fc1d-446c-87ce-24cfa07d6de4 X-Archives-Hash: 390787baa6886edd76b448a0d5cc94ce On Mon, 01 Jan 2007 13:24:49 -0800 Donnie Berkholz wrote: > That means that the base profiles must have a minimal setting that is > added to in lower profiles, rather than a reasonable default that's > entirely reset in lower profiles (perhaps to a smaller setting), > correct? It would mean that all USE_EXPANDed variables get stacked in the same way that USE does. The base profile defines a set of defaults, which gets flags added to or removed from it in other profiles. At present, from what zmedico told me, it's handled in a weird manner which essentially does half the job, letting you add flags but not remove them in subprofiles. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list