From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA4F1138010 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 23:01:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 76B9EE06B5; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 23:00:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E52FBE055E for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 22:58:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pomiocik.lan (213-238-98-26.adsl.inetia.pl [213.238.98.26]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mgorny) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 374CF33D814; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 22:58:41 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2012 00:59:40 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?TWljaGHFgiBHw7Nybnk=?= To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Cc: lxnay@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] HDEPEND (host dependencies for cross-compilation) for EAPI 5? Message-ID: <20120901005940.5a47f88b@pomiocik.lan> In-Reply-To: References: <50411874.4060204@gentoo.org> <20120831214611.088b3f50@googlemail.com> <5041288A.6030802@gentoo.org> <50413399.4030000@gentoo.org> Organization: Gentoo X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.1 (GTK+ 2.24.11; x86_64-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; micalg=PGP-SHA256; boundary="Sig_/gT0kJKxsDLZhfmCI60SS=hl"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: eb051324-0679-47e1-a8cd-a0a384c4d38c X-Archives-Hash: 9b1f733aa850317a27b273232a669cc2 --Sig_/gT0kJKxsDLZhfmCI60SS=hl Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, 1 Sep 2012 00:18:07 +0200 Fabio Erculiani wrote: > On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 11:58 PM, Zac Medico > wrote: > > > > For optional dependencies, I'm pretty happy with the > > "runtime-switchable USE flags" proposal: > > > > https://gist.github.com/2945569 >=20 > runtime-switchable USE flags for optional dependencies o.O? It sounds > like using a spoon to eat spaghetti to me. > I think SDEPEND is a much simpler approach to the issue, why > introducing a new kind of USE flags to address what really belongs to > *DEPEND? Because otherwise you can't use USE flags. The rationale is there. --=20 Best regards, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny --Sig_/gT0kJKxsDLZhfmCI60SS=hl Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iJwEAQEIAAYFAlBBQd0ACgkQfXuS5UK5QB25OwP/U4GjMTJTAXbzOfQzaRONaGes ovDh3OuphlbGgtmwFng9uRcihWhGnrfjbneS1mymCkLsJ3JElGgP6sIGD6Jb6i81 almAxbEWsdY9IO01YfOO6WB7saC+Bj3A5rSW2iHZwKUe2XExmudLLEnf6AXS/uRH J4Btj8avlFOIKcexKMQ= =lLKN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/gT0kJKxsDLZhfmCI60SS=hl--