On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 00:28 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> - base doesnt define any USE
> - default-linux defines a few local xorg USE (because no one has given us the
> ability to control default USE via IUSE yet :P)
>
> {x86,amd64}/make.defaults has the 'bloated' USE because every single sub x86
> and amd64 profile had the same USE in them ... if you want to re-push them
> into subprofiles like 200[45].[01], that's fine by me ... will have to check
> with wolf/releng so they dont revert it :PI moved them from the sub-profiles since they were redundant. As for the profiles... the versioned profiles that you see are the ones used by releng for each architecture to build the release. This means they have all of the USE flags that we want enabled for the release. While we could create a smaller set of USE flags for the "x86" (and amd64) profiles, then only add the huge USE list to the versioned profiles, it wouldn't make a bit of difference, since everything we have everywhere points the users to the versioned profiles anyway. Basically, it would add more work for whomever maintains the profiles, and our users wouldn't gain anything from it. Currently, there is nothing stopping anyone from creating a "server" sub-profile that only had a minimal set of USE flags. The reason why there isn't any is because nobody is taking the time and energy to do it. Basically, the capability is there, but with nobody actually doing it, it tells me that the demand isn't there. The other thing is that any profile that shows up in the tree under default-linux ends up being releng's responsibility, for the most part. Can't users define their own profiles? Why do we need to make one ourselves? Our profiles are "defaults", not meant to be the end-all be-all of USE flag selection. We've actually been talking about making the profiles more like this, but really need to weigh the additional work required to validate them before we go deciding that we're going to start adding profiles for specific uses. I tend to believe that if we start adding them, we'll soon be bombarded with "I want a $x profile because I don't like this one USE flag" kind of bugs. It's much easier to say "this is our defaults, change them as you like" than it is to provide multiple sets of "defaults" all of which are completely arbitrary. It would also increase the amount of work that needs to be done when the defaults do need to be changed. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead/QA Manager Games - Developer Gentoo Linux
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
