I suppose we could consider it as a hard vs soft configuration? hard enable = Enable no matter what, and cause an error soft enable = Enable, unless it would break dependency soft disable = Disable, unless it would break a dependency hard disable = Disable no matter what, and cause an error
On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 12:00 PM, Róbert Čerňanský <ope...@tightmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, 10 Feb 2016 15:23:27 +1300 > Kent Fredric <kentfred...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> I'd personally rather the list of "automatically turn this on if > > >> required" be something I had the power to restrict than have a > > >> blanket "autodostuff", because in the event some USE can't be > > Although I prefer non-explicit auto/lazy use flags, the explicit > approach is also perfectly fine (especially when compared to current > situation). In the end I would most certainly be able to specify all > use flags as lazy and thus have effectively the same behaviour as with > non-explicit approach. > > > So in comparison: > > > > /etc/portage/package.use is essentially "the world file but for > > useflags" > > > > And we have no analogue of > > > > /etc/porage/package.unmask or /etc/portage/package.keywords that > > applies to useflags. > > I find /etc/portage/package.use (or make.conf) analogous to world AND > mask files. For packages world + mask files give you possibility to > specify which packages you: > > - want (listed in world file) > - don't want (listed in a mask file) > - not care (not listed in any of them) > > (Assuming non-explicit approach) similarly for use flags, package.use > or make.conf gives you possibility to specify which use flags you: > > - want (listed in package.use or make.conf) > - don't want (listed with '-' in package.use or make.conf) > - not care (not listed in any of them) > > The advantage of explicit approach could be that even if a use flag is > enabled or disabled globally, it would still be possible to make it > lazy/automatic for specific packages. > > > I can see how some people might want an analogue of "just install > > dependencies if they're needed regardless if I said I need them" that > > applies to useflags, but you'd probably want a "don't install this > > even if it appeared to be needed" companion tool that behaves akin to > > /etc/portage/package.mask > > This would be package.use or make.conf. > > > -- > Róbert Čerňanský > E-mail: ope...@tightmail.com > Jabber: h...@jabber.sk > >
