-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 11/08/15 10:19 AM, Rich Freeman wrote: > 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/884257a2d924a51851d 629b1dc9b30df >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> 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)? >
I think the idea with USE="gui" is that the generic profiles then no longer need any qt4/qt5/gtk3/whatever flags in them at all, and the ebuilds themselves can set a single default-enable on the particular flag that should be used by default, thus allowing REQUIRED_USE to be satisfied by default when an end-user doesn't care. However, I agree that USE=gui still has the problem where the sub-flags have active state in VDB, meaning that any change to the sub-flags will trigger rebuilds on -N even if USE="-gui". And since (if i understand this thread correctly) part of the reason for doing all of this is to ensure VDB is as "accurate" as possible to what the package actually uses/needs/depends on/etc, we end up not having solved anything. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iF4EAREIAAYFAlXKEmUACgkQAJxUfCtlWe3fowEA6Sx5CtDme6K2h5Yu0yYrfUnb 2ZunvwQFlv4QAD+fQ1wA/3aX/kfviD+FttzxHgWBH3uGg1SX8DHNCFptfv9y2lJe =6i3x -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
