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 1N2Yxd-0001we-A4 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 23:26:49 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8B355E099C; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 23:26:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ew0-f206.google.com (mail-ew0-f206.google.com [209.85.219.206]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AAA7E099C for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 23:26:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ewy2 with SMTP id 2so191049ewy.34 for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:26:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:content-type:to:subject :references:date:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:from :message-id:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=HC7G6s8sfaJAsL2rV30VKSqKWgx8l0w+lwgDAmHlx74=; b=IwlAW70jcjfnyQHeQ0Lia0wxvoZRkj1hz2BQUSQWg87LKnWcLKijc8r3i49Dl4ZPl3 fRJpcbItzTI4HnVsjoDnAgaWvxwCMyVKblg44NdZH+oSH+yADbGllMV20uGyzofw4v57 93yR7AU423oaSm8TlMwlUoyNUolRjntkhz0NI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=content-type:to:subject:references:date:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding:from:message-id:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=EUvMELogsSFghjL1eeCdoTQVItVq++MAQoIHqighyC7sNBHKMpbQ1/BcQdYGH0Ex8Y gI1xyZOC+3Av9JlpKpyTY3OFVXud29NBzykcpXQSvE5mObsdke6XVVBdJX4JzkYw2Zha 3BBrWT9VFvrjTRycpPJTLDXwa6ZEurgWfaZG0= Received: by 10.210.6.8 with SMTP id 8mr3306487ebf.41.1256599606691; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:26:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zeerak (0110ds1-abc.0.fullrate.dk [90.185.49.13]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 7sm2864257eyg.17.2009.10.26.16.26.45 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:26:46 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Splitting desktop profile to KDE and GNOME References: <200910241542.17701.reavertm@gmail.com> <4AE6012C.6010307@gentoo.org> <200910270108.30347.cla@gentoo.org> Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 00:26:38 +0100 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 Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable From: "Zeerak Waseem" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <200910270108.30347.cla@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Opera Mail/10.00 (Linux) X-Archives-Salt: 97af6f3d-f04d-4443-bcac-6df3d7912b1c X-Archives-Hash: 56043633cd940d5b764299d315ac87d5 But instead of just giving the user the answer, wouldn't it be more = appropriate, as far as understanding useflags and their uses goes, to gi= ve = users lists of useflags and what they do. Ie a list of base use flags fo= r = say, kde, and also what basic useflags to disable, and a suggestion to = read the descriptions of the useflags to add what's necessary. As the = handbook currently does. I think with the documentation, one should have= = enough information to assess what useflags are desired for one's system.= = And then I'd suggest looking at the packages and the need for various us= e = flags individually, if you want to. But the documentation provides basic= = useflags for running your system. But again, this is just my take on it :-) On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 01:08:30 +0100, Dawid W=C4=99gli=C5=84ski wrote: > On Monday 26 October 2009 21:06:04 R=C3=A9mi Cardona wrote: >> Le 24/10/2009 15:42, Maciej Mrozowski a =C3=A9crit : >> > If you have any comments, suggestions, important notices regarding = = >> this >> > change, please keep discussion in gentoo-desktop mailing list. >> >> IMHO, we shouldn't even have desktop/server subprofiles to begin with= . >> >> I've always considered Gentoo to be an "opt-in" distro where after a >> successful install, you end up with a bash prompt and a _means_ of >> installing new packages. >> >> Finding out what USE flags mean and do is part of the Gentoo experien= ce. >> If we were doing spin-off distros like Ubuntu and Fedora do, then >> subprofiles would be fine, but we're not. >> > > So hmm, let me make few hypothetical statements. You see package = > foo-libs/baz > has USE=3D"pic" that is not set by default in profile. It's well = > documented in > metadata.xml which says "disable optimized assembly code that is not P= IC > friendly". So as an ordinary user you set it in your make.conf because= = > it may > be helpful. Then you want to install another package with USE=3D"pic" = but = > you > note this useflag for this package means "Force shared libraries to be= = > built as > PIC (this is slower)". Of course you don't want your programs run = > slower, do > you? So you disable useflag in make.conf or package.use. This situatio= n = > may > lead user to reinstall half of his system, because some packages with = = > USE=3D"- > pic" force foo-libs/baz[-pic] and foo-libs/bar[-pic] too. You end up w= ith > nothing after some time spent on reading metadata.xml, recompilling fo= o, = > bar, > baz... just because you were forced to have a choice. > > IMO profiles are very good solution for every user. Especially for tho= se = > that > don't know what every use flag means and they (profiles) should have a= t = > least > base useflags set. And if base, why not most of useful? They are only = = > option. > User can alwasy disable it (eg. -kde if he wants gnome, -gnome if he = > wants kde > or - both if he uses openbox). > > My $0,02.