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 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1SsJVU-00010B-6d for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 20 Jul 2012 20:09:00 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0B6EE21C036; Fri, 20 Jul 2012 20:08:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECD97E06F3 for ; Fri, 20 Jul 2012 20:08:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.145] (CPE002401f30b73-CM001cea3ddad8.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com [99.240.69.152]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: axs) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 23FE71B4012 for ; Fri, 20 Jul 2012 20:08:03 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <5009BAA0.3060608@gentoo.org> Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 16:08:00 -0400 From: Ian Stakenvicius User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.5) Gecko/20120625 Thunderbird/10.0.5 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] RFC: l10n.eclass References: <20120719151422.1fb9883b@sera-17.lan> <50087884.90006@gentoo.org> <20120720075457.4cccea26@googlemail.com> <20120720180910.748470a0@googlemail.com> <1342806195.9434.24.camel@rook> <20120720185419.23244eb7@googlemail.com> <5009ABFF.4050100@gentoo.org> <20120720201357.2f973a4f@googlemail.com> In-Reply-To: <20120720201357.2f973a4f@googlemail.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.3.5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: c4b9cf1b-8d87-4cc2-a829-070e625ddf0b X-Archives-Hash: bc99e8f28a08bb523452b0be777a0e82 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 20/07/12 03:13 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 15:05:35 -0400 Ian Stakenvicius > wrote: >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 20/07/12 01:54 >> PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: >>> On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:43:15 -0400 Alexandre Rostovtsev >>> wrote: >>>>> If you dep upon foo[linguas_en(+)] and linguas_en isn't in >>>>> IUSE, what happens? >>>> >>>> Fatal error. If a package installs its translations >>>> implicitly via gettext's rules depending on the value of >>>> LINGUAS at configure time, then obviously other packages must >>>> rely on that package having installed any particular >>>> translation. >>> >>> Uh, the entire point of the (+) is that it's *not* a fatal >>> error if you have a default. > >> If this doesn't work (assuming foo provides whatever this >> package needs it to have for linguas_en), then the dep is wrong >> in the first place and either (+) shouldn't be set or the use-dep >> on foo shouldn't exist to begin with. > > ...but (+) exists precisely because developers wanted a way of not > having fatal errors when using use dependencies. Non-defaulted use > dependencies are supposed to give errors if there's no match in > IUSE_EFFECTIVE, but unfortunately Portage chose not to make it as > strict as the Council-approved wording required. > non-fatal doesn't work in this case, because in the situation you described, the dep 'foo' -must- have linguas_en existing and enabled to work. IF foo doesn't -need- to have linguas_en existing and enabled to work, ie, if linguas_en doesn't exist but foo installed the relevant bits anyways, then foo[linguas_en(+)] is valid and works fine. Otherwise, the dep specified is wrong and it SHOULD be a fatal error. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlAJuqAACgkQ2ugaI38ACPApyQD/dtMj1l0KeJByIXXIhS+Y3Xst pj2/eoQ7q1ze2vhfPgQBALA+UatwFysIXRuFCiXrVt4vK0OlMNa58GIRpsonzGMz =cPuz -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----