On Tue, 2 Jan 2007 20:21:45 +0000 Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Jan 2007 21:14:19 +0100 Marius Mauch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > | On Mon, 1 Jan 2007 21:12:47 +0000 > | Stephen Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > | > Following a discussion in #gentoo-portage earlier this evening, it > | > was suggested that I send out an RFC email for this. So, does > anyone | > object to requiring that any variable listed in USE_EXPAND > be | > treated as incremental, at least as far as profile inheritance > is | > concerned? > | > | The main problem I see is that if it's becoming a real incremental > | (across all config layers) it would change behavior for users as > | they'd need to prefix their use-expanded vars with -* to retain > their | current config. But I guess that's why you added that final > clause | about profile scope. > > You know, making users do that wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing... > I know that Paludis users like having the option of inheriting > defaults from the profile for expanded vars... Didn't say it's a bad idea, but it's one of those things that creates a lot of noise. Marius -- [email protected] mailing list
