-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 25/07/14 03:04 PM, Luis Ressel wrote: > I guess that would solve some of the issues we've had with virtuals > in the past. I support the idea, however, I'm not sure of the > technical consequences it might have. > > I would leave the REQUIRED_USE out. It's a hassle to write, and if > an user decides to set multiple use flags on such a virtual, why > not just let him do it? >
This is something that should only be done on a case-by-case basis, as needed -- for instance, with virtual/krb5 only one provider can be installed at a time as they block eachother. We could leave it up to portage to error on mit-krb5 and heimdal being forced into the installation despite blocking eachother, but i think portage would have a better chance telling end-users about the conflict (and maybe helping to resolve it better via --autounmask?) if there was a REQUIRED_USE. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iF4EAREIAAYFAlPSrsMACgkQ2ugaI38ACPB6NgD+NK2m8iM46YMi9kITUFEIQ/ih J67PjULbQ5ZHDRQDUs4A/ik+XNbsjNQwFd08jMD1dVG0DLr7VRVvUGz1VpmQB7so =Myry -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
