On 06/02/2016 12:57 PM, Damien Levac wrote: > > > On 2016-06-02 03:42 PM, waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 09:31:11AM -0400, Damien Levac wrote >>> IMHO, you see this in reverse. the 'gui' useflag would be useful for >>> users who don't want to care about X/wayland/mir and do not want to care >>> about gtk/qt, they just want windows to be drawn for the applications >>> they install -- without, if possible, pulling useless dependencies. >> How, exactly, will the app draw windows without linking against one of >> X/wayland/mir/qt4/qt5/gtk2/gtk3/fltk or whatever else comes down the >> pike? > It will be linked to one of those, but the users don't want to care so > reasonable default would apply. > > For example, if I have setup my profile to be 'plasma', then having > 'gui' in my global use flags would mean "build with qt5 support to > provide my gui whenever possible, if not possible, fallback to whatever > is available at the discretion of the package maintainer". > > 2 nice properties I foresee this feature will have: > > * If you do not like it, don't use it. It shouldn't affect any user > unless they explicitly use the flag. > * Negating the flag would mean to not build any GUI (i.e. headless > server) which is cleaner than: '-qt3support -qt4 -qt5 -gtk -gtk3 -X > -waylang...' > > I do not think the question is whether the flag would be useful: it > will. The question is: can it be implemented efficiently... > > To play devil's advocate, can we get a citation on "users don't want to care"? Which users? Does Gentoo have a lot of users who don't care, or does it attract a more passionate audience that enjoys the control that comes with being source-based? I'm inclined to believe the latter, but I'm ready to be wrong.
-- Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C 1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
