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 084ED138010 for ; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 21:05:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 92E1721C017 for ; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 21:05:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4360AE04EC for ; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 19:08:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.33] (83.Red-83-57-69.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net [83.57.69.83]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: pacho) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E2DD433CEF7 for ; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 19:08:23 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [gentoo-portage-dev] Try to specify how to get that a USE flag is present in current ebuild From: Pacho Ramos To: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-WEj/Smsf3ix9uFuF440X" Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 21:08:20 +0200 Message-ID: <1348254500.2085.8.camel@belkin4> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.3 X-Archives-Salt: b7b9bd9e-1930-4d18-afa4-1ea6c3e72fed X-Archives-Hash: f0b5d6f91cd450e2b0178e22fc4a19fc --=-WEj/Smsf3ix9uFuF440X Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello This comes from this gentoo-dev thread: http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gentoo/dev/260536 In that one, we try to use the following: has vala ${IUSE//+/} && ! use vala && return 0=20 as already done in many eclasses/ebuilds. The problem is that Ciaran wants to forbid it because he says it's not specified in PMS. My suggestion was to simply specify it as it's currently implemented in portage because that functionality is (apart of needed) being used for a long time in the tree by numerous eclasses/ebuilds, then, from my point of view, wouldn't be any sense on lose time for moving them to current functionality to a worse one, wait for the next eapi and, finally, revert them back to current behavior. The problem is that I cannot find any doc about how this is currently handled in portage. Could you help me on it please? Thanks a lot --=-WEj/Smsf3ix9uFuF440X Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAlBcuyQACgkQCaWpQKGI+9QmuwCcCK/L/g5BNDsXv3V/I0lJC28a Ux0An1bOX7Z+qYRMgYexhmlX6FxZXa9E =B5/R -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-WEj/Smsf3ix9uFuF440X--