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 E765C1395E4 for ; Mon, 3 Aug 2015 20:10:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D930914034; Mon, 3 Aug 2015 20:10:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-yk0-f182.google.com (mail-yk0-f182.google.com [209.85.160.182]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE71814024 for ; Mon, 3 Aug 2015 20:10:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ykdu72 with SMTP id u72so120245468ykd.2 for ; Mon, 03 Aug 2015 13:10:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=WccCmHg2wqQ2ROS6G+KO7DiW48y3QeN5yVY2Ed3x2LA=; b=oJxOyhMk+MOAPJnQ2A867ENf8jHWbnm+/6w8+eDg7zcVyIXLH//e2JMzUX1HwnbC0/ Xk72T84OJ8rcGnbLsxkTZoPF+DHBlBXhqe2jAyrbeEvgQCDlVo4L4T4lC5UJ3ZWF1zPa BxJhMBQEE39efSirfJnujFXS1vS1F3YO/jUuC4fVXdIhH/I/5u3CqWuhbjWehGN4b0Bv XVkMDoLg5xh9LlP1i0Qa6Bn6QWYEHASLOwma69Sjaf/kWGvvh8W58zpD06k/HibpNtAb uVCdU/ZH80lPczJmNt+KDthTESx2AR9rNRyqcywIznKHOAk+pD4BEMWNbnRAV6rTIuG4 hjaA== X-Received: by 10.129.75.214 with SMTP id y205mr23085603ywa.65.1438632646520; Mon, 03 Aug 2015 13:10:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.2.5] (adsl-65-0-119-82.jan.bellsouth.net. [65.0.119.82]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n132sm15220395ywd.9.2015.08.03.13.10.45 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 03 Aug 2015 13:10:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <55BFCAC4.1040702@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2015 15:10:44 -0500 From: Dale User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:36.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/36.0 SeaMonkey/2.33.1 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] useflag policies References: <1529265.CbNzYPavOm@localhost> <1603785.jMhK8ZuARh@liwardyna> In-Reply-To: <1603785.jMhK8ZuARh@liwardyna> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 7dc45a9d-e44e-4712-8cf9-7247ecc7a237 X-Archives-Hash: 3092ca23ed92cc302e84dffa3218676a Maciej Mrozowski wrote: > On Sunday 02 of August 2015 21:37:36 Rich Freeman wrote: > | The approach qt4=3Dqt4 > | and qt5=3Dqt5 seems simpler on the surface, but it means that users e= nd > | up having to set tons of per-package configurations when they don't > | actually care which one they use, > > I will risk a thesis that if they didn't care, they wouldn't have chose= n=20 > Gentoo... > > regards > MM > > You may lose that one if I'm seeing your point correctly. See Alan and my earlier replies. I have both qt4 and qt5 set and I leave which is best to use to the devs to control in the ebuild. If for example qt5 does not work well for a package, let the ebuild pick qt4 for that package. If qt5 works reliably, then build with qt5. If I have a problem with it, then I can set it in package.use if needed, doesn't build or function correctly or I want qt5 even if it isn't stable. As things switch to qt5 more, I don't have to do anything except let the updates roll out as they become stable and the dev sets that in the ebuild.=20 Keep in mind, devs already do a LOT of the selection process.=20 Otherwise, we could set any and every USE flag and package combination there is without any restrictions. In other words, we could have USE flag soup even if it is known that two or more USE flags clash. As it is, if a dev knows two flags clash, we get a nifty error message and then we get to figure out how to get it to work right, sometimes portage's error message is cryptic to say the least.=20 If I took your point wrong, my apologies. Lowly user. Dale :-) :-)=20