Re: [gentoo-dev] Stupid USE defaults that need cleaning

[Andrew Muraco <tuxp3@leetworks.com>]

Lares Moreau wrote:

>On Mon, 2005-12-26 at 12:36 -0600, Joe McCann wrote:
>  
>
>>For the record, the eds flag was
>>added as a default flag because every 3rd gnome user would file bugs or
>>complain via forums because they installed gnome, found no
>>evolution-data-server integration, and then be bummed when they had to
>>recompile packages again. This whole thread seems to have come from a
>>misunderstanding of how use.defaults work and 20 min of boredom.
>>    
>>
>I'm relatively ignorant of USE Flag intricacies, so please forgive me if
>things don't 'fit'.
>
>Is it feasible and or useful to have a 'meta-flag' that that enables all
>the 'necessary' USE flags for a given group of packages?  So something
>like USE='meta-<flagname>'. 
>This has the distinction of being a meta-flag, and as such nothing
>really gets turned on 'behind the users back', advanced users can look
>into it and see what is being enabled by it and USE='-flag' for the
>flags the users doesn't need/want, and expert users would just not use
>it. This way meta packages like KDE and Gnome can have their own
>meta-flag to do what the need with.
>
>It also seems to me that more things will need to 'just work' as our
>user-base becomes larger and, on average, less advanced. We could amend
>the desktop guide to include something like USE='meta-gnome' to the
>gnome section. And similar to other meta-flags.
>
>This may add an unnecessary level of complexity to the use flag system,
>but also may be very useful. 
>  
>

If I remember right theres a GLEP (#29) that purposes to do something 
very similar (USE Groups I think it was called), but I believe its 
withdrawn.

Regards,
Andrew
Tux
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list