On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 9:42 AM, Sergey Popov <pinkb...@gentoo.org> wrote: > 11.08.2015 16:36, Rich Freeman пишет: >> On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 9:19 AM, Sergey Popov <pinkb...@gentoo.org> wrote: >>> 11.08.2015 16:11, James Le Cuirot пишет: >>>> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 15:58:49 +0300 >>>> Sergey Popov <pinkb...@gentoo.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> If both of flags are not set - we stick to default. >>>>> Should this be set in EVERY ebuild explicitly? >>>>> >>>>> Maybe provide some sugar like $(qt_use_default qtgui 5), where >>>>> qt_use_default is the name of function, qtgui is the package and 5 is >>>>> the slot for default choice, where either BOTH of flags(qt4, qt5) are >>>>> enabled or disabled >>>> >>>> That sounds a little bit like what I suggested earlier. >>>> >>>> https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/message/884257a2d924a51851d629b1dc9b30df >>>> >>> >>> But without introducing brand new useless USE flag. Which makes huge >>> difference to me :-) >>> >> >> If we want the typical user to not set either qt4 or qt5, are we >> saying that any package that could use either always enable one of >> them by default? Then all users get a GUI by default, and then users >> have to explicitly disable it? That seems to be the opposite of how >> we normally do things, but it does let you get away from having lots >> of users turning on qt. > > I suggested this for packages, where GUI can not be disabled AND it > should be either qt4 or qt5. Then, if we do not add + to USE > description, users without anything in make.conf just run the blocker >
What if the GUI can be disabled? Should we force users to set USE="-qt4 -qt5" to disable the GUI? Or should we force users to put one of those in their make.conf or profile to enable it (causing problems with packages that don't allow both)? -- Rich
