Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 02:08:01 -0400
> Andrew D Kirch wrote:
>
> Given that your stated intention is for "Paludis to fail", and that
> "opposing [me] and everything [I] do was an initiative [you] started
> only after careful consideration", I'll kindly ask you to stop ran
On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 19:32:02 +0200
Harald van Dijk wrote:
> Also, are USE dependencies possible with implicit IUSE? If
> not, things like DEPEND="dev-lang/python[-build]" would have to be
> changed even though they're probably a good idea.
Use dependencies are possible. Use dependency defaults are
On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 05:02:10AM +0200, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
wrote:
> 2009-07-07 01:01:11 Ciaran McCreesh napisał(a):
> > ...
> > IUSE_IMPLICIT="build debug"
> >
> > Are people wanting to make those implicit?
>
> IMHO they shouldn't be implicit.
Agreed. They shouldn't be im
On Wed, 8 Jul 2009 05:02:34 +0200
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
> > IUSE_IMPLICIT="build debug"
> >
> > Are people wanting to make those implicit?
>
> IMHO they shouldn't be implicit.
I should probably explain the rationale behind those two...
Back in the day, various eclasses
2009-07-07 01:01:11 Ciaran McCreesh napisał(a):
> ...
> Finally, there's room to include plain old flags in IUSE automatically.
> This was added to the specification as a hypothetical "we might want
> this, and it's easy to specify and implement" rather than a "we'll
> definitely be using this". Fl
I don't see the point for this reply seeing that Andrew admitted he
was in error half-an-hour ago in this very thread.
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 7:22 PM, Ciaran
McCreesh wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 02:08:01 -0400
> Andrew D Kirch wrote:
>> I've talked with the pkgcore people and they don't use the
On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 02:08:01 -0400
Andrew D Kirch wrote:
> I've talked with the pkgcore people and they don't use the EAPI's (or
> PMS) in the first place.
If that were true, which it isn't, then by Council decision pkgcore
should have been package.masked.
> This essentially leaves you writing d
Yeah, that was definately a misunderstanding of something bonzaikitten said.
Mea culpa.
Andrew
Brian Harring wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 02:08:01AM -0400, Andrew D Kirch wrote:
>
>> Ciaran,
>>
>> I've talked with the pkgcore people and they don't use the EAPI's (or
>> PMS) in the first p
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 11:08 PM, Andrew D Kirch wrote:
> Ciaran,
>
> I've talked with the pkgcore people and they don't use the EAPI's (or
> PMS) in the first place. This essentially leaves you writing documents
> you're requiring for paludis support. As this seems to be mostly a PM
> issue, it s
On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 02:08:01AM -0400, Andrew D Kirch wrote:
> Ciaran,
>
> I've talked with the pkgcore people and they don't use the EAPI's (or
> PMS) in the first place.
No clue who you talked to, but they weren't speaking for pkgcore- I
speak for pkgcore pretty much solely. Pkgcore util
Ciaran,
I've talked with the pkgcore people and they don't use the EAPI's (or
PMS) in the first place. This essentially leaves you writing documents
you're requiring for paludis support. As this seems to be mostly a PM
issue, it should be taken elsewhere. To that end, here is a
gentoo-portage-d
EAPI 3 makes IUSE strict: flags not listed in IUSE can't be used in
dependency strings, use queries and so on. However, the specification
includes ways of implicitly adding things to the effective value of
IUSE via the base profile make.defaults. What the specification doesn't
say, and what hasn't
12 matches
Mail list logo
