El mié, 31-07-2013 a las 22:32 -0400, Alexandre Rostovtsev escribió: > On Wed, 2013-07-31 at 22:12 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: > > Honestly, I don't think maintainers should be asked to justify > > features unless they're actually causing some kind of conflict. > > > > If Robin wants to support USE=static for lvm2, he can do so. If it > > somehow caused problems with other packages that would be a different > > matter, but I can't see how a static binary should hurt anything. If > > he wanted to drop dynamic linking support I'd also be concerned. > > However, maintainers should be free to support options even if some > > consider them a waste of time. > > > > If Robin wants to satisfy our idle curiosity he can do so, but let's > > not hound maintainers willing to do extra work unless they're actually > > causing problems. > > The problem is when that extra work results in a flag on virtual/udev > which cannot be satisfied by some of the virtual's implementations (like > systemd) and which then leads to several screen lengths of uninformative > portage errors facing users who are upgrading to gnome-3.8. > > >
And also forces sys-apps/udev maintainers to keep patching it to "support" static stuff on it, even when upstream don't care about it and disabled it
