On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 09:09:15PM +0200, Paul de Vrieze wrote: > On Wednesday 21 June 2006 15:45, Donnie Berkholz wrote: > > > > -qt +qt3: > > > > This would only be available in 2 cases: > > > > - Package supports both qt4 and qt3, and they're mutually exclusive > > - Package supports both qt4 and qt3, and they can both be enabled at once > > > > In case 1, "-qt +qt3" would enable qt3. In case 2, "-qt +qt3" would > > enable qt3. > > > > In other words, as I've been trying to say all along, there is no such > > thing as a preference flag here. That creates a 2-flag combination to > > get a single feature, which is _not_ what we want. There is a "qt" flag > > to indicate enabling the best available qt for that package, and there > > are "qt#" flags to indicate enabling older qt for that package. > > > > The downside to this setup is that it's difficult to avoid installing > > certain qt versions when it's unknown which version USE=qt will pull in > > for any given package. This favors an entirely versioned setup instead, > > and we should get rid of USE=qt altogether in favor of only USE=qt#. > > Avoiding installation of a package can IMHO better be done by > using /etc/portage/package.mask
Arguably better, but sure not easier. It requires lots of entries in /etc/portage/package.use since portage won't automatically disable the qt flag if the required qt version is masked, and when packages change from/to qt3 to/from qt4, there is no way for portage to let the user know (so that "cat/pkg -qt" can be removed from package.use again). -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
