public inbox for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Robert Bridge <robert@robbieab.com>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev]  Re: [RFC] PROPERTIES=set for meta-packages that should behave like package sets
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2008 13:19:08 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081002131908.20627562@robbieab.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <48E3A745.4070709@gentoo.org>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1914 bytes --]

On Wed, 01 Oct 2008 09:37:25 -0700
Zac Medico <zmedico@gentoo.org> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Ryan Hill wrote:
> > On Mon, 29 Sep 2008 22:31:46 -0700
> > Zac Medico <zmedico@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > 
> >>> Can package.use syntax be extended to allow set entries?
> >>> @compiz-fusion -gnome kde kde4
> >> Perhaps, but we need to clarify how that sort of setting will
> >> affect nested sets. For example, if @compiz-fusion contains nested
> >> sets, would those USE settings apply to the nested sets as well?
> >> Will nested sets be allowed to have independent USE settings from
> >> the sets that nest them?
> > 
> > Maybe a nested set could inherit the USE flag settings of its
> > parent set unless it has its own entry in package.use.
> > 
> > Though what happens if a package is in both sets which have
> > conflicting flags in package.use?  I would say that the nested set
> > has to have priority.  If not, I can easily imagine people getting
> > confused when their USE settings for a set are being applied to all
> > but one or two packages.
> 
> It seems to me that the most logical approach would be to do some
> sort of "incremental" stacking, similar to the way that USE flags
> stack in the profiles. Suppose that we have the following settings
> in package.use:
> 
>  @kde-meta    foo bar
>  @kdeedu-meta -foo
> 
> If the flags are stacked incrementally, analogously to the way that
> they are stacked in profiles, then the above setting would apply the
> "foo" and "bar" flags to all of @kde-meta except for the
> @kdeedu-meta subset which would only have "bar" applied since "foo"
> has been disabled incrementally. Does this approach seem reasonable?

From a lowly users perspective, I would say this is more intuitive. It
fits with the expected policy of the closest flag to the package taking
precedence...

Rob.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

  parent reply	other threads:[~2008-10-02 12:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-09-28  0:21 [gentoo-dev] [RFC] PROPERTIES=set for meta-packages that should behave like package sets Zac Medico
2008-09-28 15:24 ` Marius Mauch
2008-09-28 17:42   ` Zac Medico
2008-09-28 20:26     ` Ciaran McCreesh
2008-09-28 20:44       ` Zac Medico
2008-09-28 20:32 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2008-09-28 20:53   ` Zac Medico
2008-09-28 21:01     ` Ciaran McCreesh
2008-09-28 22:11       ` Zac Medico
2008-09-28 22:28         ` Ciaran McCreesh
2008-09-28 22:56           ` Zac Medico
2008-09-28 23:02             ` Ciaran McCreesh
2008-09-28 23:37               ` Zac Medico
2008-09-29 15:13                 ` Bo Ørsted Andresen
2008-09-29 19:52                   ` Zac Medico
2008-09-30  4:47                     ` Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
2008-09-30  5:31                       ` Zac Medico
2008-10-01  4:35                         ` [gentoo-dev] " Ryan Hill
2008-10-01 16:37                           ` Zac Medico
2008-10-02  2:51                             ` Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
2008-10-04  6:05                               ` Ryan Hill
2008-10-04  6:42                                 ` Ryan Hill
2008-10-04 17:17                                   ` Zac Medico
2008-10-05 17:55                                     ` Ryan Hill
2008-10-13  2:11                                       ` Steve Long
2008-10-02 12:19                             ` Robert Bridge [this message]
2008-09-29  2:52             ` Duncan
2008-09-29  6:40               ` Zac Medico
2008-09-29 11:52                 ` Duncan
2008-09-29  6:04 ` [gentoo-dev] " Rémi Cardona
2008-09-29  6:33   ` Zac Medico
2008-09-29 19:52     ` [gentoo-dev] " Steve Long
2008-09-29 20:28       ` Zac Medico
2008-09-29 20:42         ` [gentoo-dev] " Steve Long

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20081002131908.20627562@robbieab.com \
    --to=robert@robbieab.com \
    --cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox