From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NxSGc-0005el-ET for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 21:49:34 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2C593E0898; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 21:49:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8616AE088C for ; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 21:49:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.22.10] (ip68-4-152-120.oc.oc.cox.net [68.4.152.120]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 166131B4016 for ; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 21:49:09 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4BB51558.30201@gentoo.org> Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 14:51:20 -0700 From: Zac Medico User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686 (x86_64); en-US; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100315 Thunderbird/3.0.3 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 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-council] pkg_pretend USE validation and VALID_USE alternative References: <20100331092035.GA11663@hrair> <19379.6773.901690.630124@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20100331104647.GD11663@hrair> <20100401224410.09e9006a@amit.kihnet.sk> In-Reply-To: <20100401224410.09e9006a@amit.kihnet.sk> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 69f5e6d7-a3e7-4c3a-a5ca-356d243ea318 X-Archives-Hash: 629cb2c8e16b0e9834276dfe72b7bcfc On 04/01/2010 01:44 PM, R=C3=B3bert =C4=8Cer=C5=88ansk=C3=BD wrote: > If I'm getting this right the proposed behavior is such that in case of > conflicting use flags emerge fails and user gets a message that he > has to set use flags as required. If so then I think it is not the righ= t > way to handle it. A package manager should be able do deal with (use > flag) dependencies automatically. Similarly as it deals with "normal" > package dependenicies. >=20 > It should not do this silenly though. emerge -pv should display real > state of use flags; so if some use flag has to be turned on > automatically due to dependency/conflict then it has to be shown so. >=20 > This apply also for package[use_flag] deps. It is not very convenient > to fiddle use flags for individual packages that I basically do not car= e > about because they are just dependencies; so natural expectation is > that package manager pulls required deps. automatically (whether it > means install a package or install a package _with_ switched use flag). >=20 > I hope this does not sound that I'm dictating you what is the right way > to do things. I just wanted to express my opinion. And I admit that > perhaps I do not see possible negative consequences of such behaviour. I appreciate your input, and I think you're right about this issue. However, it seems to be essentially a user interface issue, and therefore it doesn't necessarily need to be included in the specification (except maybe as a side note). --=20 Thanks, Zac