From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Kk2wR-0004X2-K0 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 28 Sep 2008 20:32:32 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CEEE9E067A; Sun, 28 Sep 2008 20:32:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ey-out-1920.google.com (ey-out-1920.google.com [74.125.78.150]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F8AFE067A for ; Sun, 28 Sep 2008 20:32:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ey-out-1920.google.com with SMTP id 4so451826eyk.10 for ; Sun, 28 Sep 2008 13:32:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:date:from:to:subject :message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer:mime-version :content-type; bh=nsg5cNSHM1T9ofS3GsYStzS90bmVDiZEV/4i6s6FMDA=; b=dENHJFxQsQq2FBNaSlDJkd69b5KAFKJ6i/G0/KEELmg3QIRaq4CGLdZjIi+ko7R9Ak kcd6jAJbagtTr6Heeyp2xdfOjI0yAmH67EtNCiIMdt5DL3Jwmtr9K1J+FcrzbGFcjLK9 Zqg7SV/9ZSVTZYBWS8rywEEtSamYrlHA02gOc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer :mime-version:content-type; b=arxKiXDi1GeTEQVxW723qOxSjVndj/bcwZW2Yis1uoODI6a+WHbSHkulkkxrP+Gwc4 rHHu2EC/ZiTWX9VJalozefP18+7lch5yPZuZWeHtAMDrHPQK7NRvwoqkEYN2xUgVjyay Blpjrvohjbrc5ilUxepSUuN0fIWGSBHeY2lfY= Received: by 10.210.67.4 with SMTP id p4mr2323637eba.70.1222633949253; Sun, 28 Sep 2008 13:32:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from snowmobile (92-235-187-79.cable.ubr18.edin.blueyonder.co.uk [92.235.187.79]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id q9sm2606529gve.5.2008.09.28.13.32.27 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sun, 28 Sep 2008 13:32:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2008 21:32:19 +0100 From: Ciaran McCreesh To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] PROPERTIES=set for meta-packages that should behave like package sets Message-ID: <20080928213219.66a30341@snowmobile> In-Reply-To: <48DECDFE.7010606@gentoo.org> References: <48DECDFE.7010606@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.5.0 (GTK+ 2.12.11; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_/yo6WbHJG1OFKyem+8pA+mmS"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=PGP-SHA1 X-Archives-Salt: 7dde7c4b-f77c-4443-9618-cd17c214e6c6 X-Archives-Hash: 31e64e8b5ade053574e3a3f99ca266b8 --Sig_/yo6WbHJG1OFKyem+8pA+mmS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, 27 Sep 2008 17:21:18 -0700 Zac Medico wrote: > Does this seem like a good approach? Are there any suggestions for > improvements or alternative approaches? Strikes me as a good way of causing extreme confusion for users... Consider sets in package.use, for example. Any specified flags should apply to the entire set. But what about set-property packages? Sets and packages aren't the same thing, and shouldn't be treated as if they are. --=20 Ciaran McCreesh --Sig_/yo6WbHJG1OFKyem+8pA+mmS Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkjf6dYACgkQ96zL6DUtXhE5iACfZnsfLtqTvF3hf+I5ibwdS86K wjcAniYA/rPRhxwYm/b6IJdZP/Egyp8O =lG0u -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/yo6WbHJG1OFKyem+8pA+mmS--