On Sat, 2006-06-10 at 19:56 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Saturday 10 June 2006 10:29, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > > On Fri, 2006-06-09 at 18:34 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > > On Friday 09 June 2006 16:35, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > > > > This is the "official" (hehe) request for comments on making a policy > > > > of how to handle ebuilds than can be used for either client or server > > > > and how to allow for building client-only. > > > > > > rather than moving to some sort of policy that satisfies no one > > > completely and we'll have to back out of later, why dont we wait until > > > portage can give us proper support for USE=client/server > > > > Got an ETA? > > > > The situation we have now is confusing, at best, to our users, and > > something really should be done to resolve it. > > sure, dont add support for the flags at all at this point, problem solved
You apparently missed that there already are packages in the tree using these flags, as well as minimal. This inconsistent usage is what I was trying to solve in the first place. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead x86 Architecture Team Games - Developer Gentoo Linux
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
