From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.54) id 1FEBL9-0004hJ-Qx for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 28 Feb 2006 20:21:00 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id k1SKJaB4018445; Tue, 28 Feb 2006 20:19:36 GMT Received: from creativecommunications.com (creativecommunications.com [65.17.124.162]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id k1SKJZm8027379 for ; Tue, 28 Feb 2006 20:19:35 GMT Received: from [192.168.1.145] (unknown [192.168.1.145]) by creativecommunications.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87E20229C002 for ; Tue, 28 Feb 2006 14:23:10 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <4404B07E.4040406@gentoo.org> Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 14:20:14 -0600 From: Andrew Gaffney User-Agent: Mail/News 1.5 (X11/20060112) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-installer@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-installer@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-installer@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-installer] version 0.3 of the Gentoo Linux Installer References: <44044871.200@gentoo.org> <47103.141.38.43.231.1141140894.squirrel@ulm114.server4you.de> <440471D4.2010006@gentoo.org> <44047382.9080804@gentoo.org> <440480D5.7000303@smash-net.org> <440481C7.7040607@gentoo.org> <4404A8AF.8010604@smash-net.org> <4404AA91.3030805@gentoo.org> <4404ADED.9060801@smash-net.org> In-Reply-To: <4404ADED.9060801@smash-net.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by robin.gentoo.org id k1SKJaBe018445 X-Archives-Salt: 639ef963-1938-4892-bd7c-a458895eb7e5 X-Archives-Hash: 96bd7857b4708fd4c9976ff1d3d1d92d Norman Rie=DF wrote: > Donnie Berkholz schrieb: >=20 >> >> >> The portage team just got rid of exactly this capability for creating >> difficult to reproduce USE flag setups, because they were dynamic, bas= ed >> on what's installed rather than set unconditionally in make.conf. >> >> So it's a difficult argument to say we should re-add it into the=20 >> installer. >> >> Thanks, >> Donnie >> >> =20 >> > Why difficult to reproduce? Same software should create same USE-flag=20 > settings. > I find it a little funny, that an official installer installes a perhap= s=20 > not working system "by default". > I think that misses the point of an installer! USE flags control optional stuff. If something doesn't work because of a = missing=20 USE flag, that's a bug with that particular ebuild. --=20 Andrew Gaffney http://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney= / Gentoo Linux Developer Installer Projec= t --=20 gentoo-installer@gentoo.org mailing list