Il giorno sab 25 ago 2018 alle ore 01:45 Zac Medico <zmed...@gentoo.org> ha
scritto:
> On 08/24/2018 04:14 PM, Francesco Riosa wrote:
> >
> > Il 24/08/18 19:08, Mike Gilbert ha scritto:
> >> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 10:45 AM Kent Fredric <ken...@gentoo.org>
> wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 10:27:01 -0400
> >>> Mike Gilbert <flop...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> If you want to define behavior that can be relied upon in ebuilds, it
> >>>> should be specified in PMS. PMS does not define any meaning for the
> >>>> "test" USE flag.
> >>> We should eschew idealism about how the world *should* behave, and
> avoid
> >>> making portage a steaming garbage heap in order to comply with a
> >>> terrible PMS specification of a heavily used feature.
> >> Portage still works just fine for most people who would enable
> >> FEATURES=test. Stop exaggerating.
> >>
> > People enabling FEATURES=test on most but not all packages had some
> > troubles and they need to disable them in both package.{env,use}
> > I'd like to have a flag to reinstate the previous portage behaviour, but
> > that's probably too late
>
> Would a FEATURES setting that implies RESTRICT="!test? ( test )" for all
> ebuilds do what you want?
>
"want" is too much,
but it would have been pleasant to have something to keep portage
dependancies working as before.
"testrespectuse" or "usetestrespectfeatures" come to mind or another
command line option.
> --
> Thanks,
> Zac
>
