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 1OLWoB-0008LA-TO for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 07 Jun 2010 07:31:44 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6DB76E0A86; Mon, 7 Jun 2010 07:31:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pw0-f53.google.com (mail-pw0-f53.google.com [209.85.160.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 339F8E0A86 for ; Mon, 7 Jun 2010 07:31:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: by pwj8 with SMTP id 8so1285751pwj.40 for ; Mon, 07 Jun 2010 00:31:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:received:date:from:to:subject :message-id:references:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=+KxH7ldJ+kbYBtGkBbHr59jlb4SD0cxflrBte26tegg=; b=V/xavNObVTdlI+CWsudnoLJlLwR4PCPwB4EplNJZWqxdklyy87dMww1TfkzVv55ZEL AAynV49mhEmml5/MeNYUrx5STSslY4sgQQ8f8TzyNKrmSguUHvNolFL9Ady4gxrecvZe mGBP/K8ERE37d3tdfGH0YvUjXl/ykSP+7pAdM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=gFbgWnkWpUGzca0PDs/nJw9jjqNqE12Nxdt8y1BgOObicw5hTObrffD4/yVEiXE/pi bzWPivJs+K1825zY5uwqMyS15SodOuymuee9zps+AfLuPHJKQIljyQkgsR/v8d5gBdjX H4lBSgFfjaUR7YU4NPSJcFPvasAKyfz9UWf+4= Received: by 10.114.7.17 with SMTP id 17mr11117763wag.128.1275895900781; Mon, 07 Jun 2010 00:31:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.gmail.com (c-67-171-128-62.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [67.171.128.62]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id r20sm36385787wam.17.2010.06.07.00.31.38 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 07 Jun 2010 00:31:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by smtp.gmail.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 07 Jun 2010 00:29:46 -0700 Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2010 00:29:46 -0700 From: Brian Harring To: gentoo-pms@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-pms] why is '@' allowed in use flags Message-ID: <20100607072946.GG6316@hrair> References: <20100607052303.GE6316@hrair> <20100607082647.310ba5da@snowcone> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Package Manager Specification discussions X-BeenThere: gentoo-pms@gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-pms@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="dWYAkE0V1FpFQHQ3" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100607082647.310ba5da@snowcone> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Archives-Salt: 3eb963c6-7e97-4289-9855-6eb18af65646 X-Archives-Hash: b7bbf20fabfd782ac568189019d5590e --dWYAkE0V1FpFQHQ3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Jun 07, 2010 at 08:26:47AM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Sun, 6 Jun 2010 22:23:03 -0700 > Brian Harring wrote: > > Anyone know where '@' in use flags came from? Last I knew, the=20 > > intention of '@' was to be used as a seperator/marker for use groups;= =20 > > it currently has zero users in gentoo-x86, thus I'm wondering=20 > > where/why it was originally allowed. >=20 > Linguas. Fark. Knew I was forgetting to grep somewhere... Follow up discussion point; anyone got a character to use for=20 seperating use_expand groups and their members? I'm well aware '_' is=20 used right now, but it's use is nonoptimal- the only way to break down=20 a use_expanded target in IUSE is to know the use_expand grouppings=20 themselves, which is profile defined... a flaw I've hated since day=20 one. ~harring --dWYAkE0V1FpFQHQ3 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.15 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkwMn+oACgkQsiLx3HvNzgeCQwCgz/Rn96ew7OW5utJ0Vj/lKEpu zcUAnRqDMpHy/N5zK0Hae7qAxtUSgN2H =P7ew -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --dWYAkE0V1FpFQHQ3--