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 4.54) id 1Er0vV-0002nb-O4 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 26 Dec 2005 22:34:46 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id jBQMXanF025298; Mon, 26 Dec 2005 22:33:36 GMT Received: from mta11.adelphia.net (mta11.adelphia.net [68.168.78.205]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id jBQMVeSS028108 for ; Mon, 26 Dec 2005 22:31:41 GMT Received: from [192.168.0.165] (really [68.168.137.100]) by mta11.adelphia.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with ESMTP id <20051226223139.IAZO5278.mta11.adelphia.net@[192.168.0.165]> for ; Mon, 26 Dec 2005 17:31:39 -0500 Message-ID: <43B06F46.3040504@leetworks.com> Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2005 17:31:34 -0500 From: Andrew Muraco User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (X11/20051102) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en 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 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Stupid USE defaults that need cleaning References: <43AF7B25.6060803@gentoo.org> <20051226153533.695493e4@snowdrop.home> <1962459692.20051226175717@gentoo.org> <1135622183.3203.27.camel@zelda.hyrule> <1135635587.7410.32.camel@localhost> In-Reply-To: <1135635587.7410.32.camel@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: de2f6623-43f1-406f-b890-e46df26b9f87 X-Archives-Hash: 5ed275500bcecb2502069b1acce0b775 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-'. >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