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 E79B1138010 for ; Sat, 1 Sep 2012 18:16:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 10AB2E04D2; Sat, 1 Sep 2012 18:16:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69F15E03E0 for ; Sat, 1 Sep 2012 18:15:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.26.5] (ip98-164-193-252.oc.oc.cox.net [98.164.193.252]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: zmedico) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E152733D815 for ; Sat, 1 Sep 2012 18:15:17 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <504250B4.9000004@gentoo.org> Date: Sat, 01 Sep 2012 11:15:16 -0700 From: Zac Medico User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120802 Thunderbird/14.0 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] HDEPEND (host dependencies for cross-compilation) for EAPI 5? References: <50411874.4060204@gentoo.org> <20120831214611.088b3f50@googlemail.com> <5041288A.6030802@gentoo.org> <50413399.4030000@gentoo.org> <504142BD.7060905@gentoo.org> <20120901000738.78198cd4@googlemail.com> <504168D7.7090901@gentoo.org> <20120901170054.480394ef@googlemail.com> In-Reply-To: <20120901170054.480394ef@googlemail.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5a1pre Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: e087599f-b616-4c4d-9945-bfbe8d68aeda X-Archives-Hash: ad4c20271623512e074f2bf45dd5897e On 09/01/2012 09:00 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Fri, 31 Aug 2012 18:45:59 -0700 > Zac Medico wrote: >> On 08/31/2012 04:07 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: >>> On Fri, 31 Aug 2012 16:03:25 -0700 >>> Zac Medico wrote: >>>>> runtime-switchable USE flags for optional dependencies o.O? It >>>>> sounds like using a spoon to eat spaghetti to me. >>>> >>>> All suggested deps are not equal, so USE flags give you the >>>> ability to pick and choose the ones that you want. >>> >>> So does --take / --ignore with suggested dependencies, with the >>> added advantage that suggested packages don't end up being brought >>> in without user request just because a user has a particular use >>> flag enabled globally. >> >> If the USE flags have ambiguous meanings doesn't that mean that >> they've been poorly named? > > It's not like that. It's that in practice, suggestions are mostly for a > particular specific feature (such as git-send-email support), not for a > general concept (such as email in general). > > It also defeats the point of suggestions, if they're not made visible. > For users, suggestions should look like suggestions, and they should > be able to see them easily. This sounds more like a user-interface issue than a problem with runtime-switchable USE flags (GLEP 62). The nice thing about runtime-switchable USE flags is that makes it possible to allow users to unify all of their optional dependency choices in their USE flag settings. You can still implement a --take / --ignore mechanism while allowing the use of runtime-switchable USE conditionals in SDEPEND. It's simply a matter of ignoring the USE conditionals and instead using your --take / --ignore mechanism to select atoms. -- Thanks, Zac