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 925B759CA9 for ; Thu, 31 Mar 2016 04:07:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7AECA21C01F; Thu, 31 Mar 2016 04:07:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5AA4121C00A for ; Thu, 31 Mar 2016 04:07:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.0.20] (ip68-5-185-102.oc.oc.cox.net [68.5.185.102]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: zmedico) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B3D46340D59 for ; Thu, 31 Mar 2016 04:07:48 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] USE_EXPAND in profiles? To: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <1459342262.3538.28.camel@infinera.com> <1459347868.3538.32.camel@infinera.com> From: Zac Medico Message-ID: <56FCA292.80500@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2016 21:07:46 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.0 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 In-Reply-To: <1459347868.3538.32.camel@infinera.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 15d91a71-4b67-4c03-a8a7-226e843c46b9 X-Archives-Hash: b8b919af6873215557c617d60f0418f6 On 03/30/2016 07:22 AM, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: > On Thu, 2016-03-31 at 02:26 +1300, Kent Fredric wrote: >> On 31 March 2016 at 01:49, Joakim Tjernlund >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> I am missing something? >>> Generally I think that everything possible to do under /etc/portage should be >>> doable under a profile as well. >> >> So after you ignore my other stuff: Profiles are part of the PMS >> specification, so any changes that go in there have to be EAPI >> scheduled and cried over for a bit, and probably GLEPs and stuff also. >> >> I guess portage could informally support it prior to any such >> specification materialising, but it would have to be forbidden in the >> main tree until such a specification was defined, or the portage tree >> would become PMS in-compatible. > > Yes, exactly! There is no need to use non PMS compatible features in > the gentoo tree. We hide extensions like this behind profile-formats settings in metadata/layout.conf. Please file a feature request bug for this at bugs.gentoo.org. -- Thanks, Zac