Mailing List Archive

Donnie Berkholz skrev:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> The first release candidate was announced roughly 12 hours ago. And
> fitting the Gentoo you know as up to the minute, so far beyond the
> bleeding edge that it's wearing a Band-Aid before it starts to bleed,
> comes the complete package in Portage -- all 296 packages worth.
>
> Thanks to the dedicated work of Joshua Baergen and me, you've got just
> what you asked for -- newer X than even money can buy. Pound on it, test
> it, break it, and file bugs. Let us know how it works.
>
> Metabuilds should be forthcoming shortly. I'd appreciate input on
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~spyderous/xorg-x11/metabuilds.txt and in
> particular from people on the GNOME and KDE teams.
>
> Thanks,
> Donnie

Will you add a ebuild for the 6.9-RC1 release also, or will gentoo go
completely for the modular tree?

--
Simon Strandman <simon.strandman@telia.com>

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

On Thu, 2005-10-20 at 00:11 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> The first release candidate was announced roughly 12 hours ago. And
> fitting the Gentoo you know as up to the minute, so far beyond the
> bleeding edge that it's wearing a Band-Aid before it starts to bleed,
> comes the complete package in Portage -- all 296 packages worth.
>
> Thanks to the dedicated work of Joshua Baergen and me, you've got just
> what you asked for -- newer X than even money can buy. Pound on it, test
> it, break it, and file bugs. Let us know how it works.
>
> Metabuilds should be forthcoming shortly. I'd appreciate input on
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~spyderous/xorg-x11/metabuilds.txt and in
> particular from people on the GNOME and KDE teams.


Bloody awesome!


A question, do you want test-builds against the current -stable- tree or
the current ~ tree for various architectures?


//Spider
--
begin .signature
Tortured users / Laughing in pain
See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information.
end

On Thursday 20 October 2005 09:11, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Metabuilds should be forthcoming shortly. I'd appreciate input on
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~spyderous/xorg-x11/metabuilds.txt and in
> particular from people on the GNOME and KDE teams.

KDE doesn't have any special requirements. It doesn't use any kind of X11
build tool (what is there other than imake?). It does use some X apps like
xmessage, xset etc. After you commit your metaebuilds we'll update the deps
as needed. The only metaebuild we'll need to depend on is -libs.

However, consider this usecase: user (who's used to the old docs) installs new
stage3, types 'emerge kde', runs kdm... oops, no X server...

To keep the current behaviour, the kde metaebuild (and gnome and the other
WMs) would have to depend on xorg-x11, which strictly speaking is
unnecessary. Opinions? How can we educate the users to manually 'emerge
xorg-x11'? Personally I'm in favor of updating the docs, making a big
announcement on all channels, and preparing a nice bug to close duplicates
against.

We'll also need to educate them about xorg-x11 not installing fonts any
longer. The way I understood your metabuilds.txt, 'emerge xorg-x11 kde' would
result in an unusable system without any fonts at all...

--
Dan Armak
Gentoo Linux developer (KDE)
Public GPG key: http://dev.gentoo.org/~danarmak/danarmak-gpg-public.key
Fingerprint: DD70 DBF9 E3D4 6CB9 2FDD 0069 508D 9143 8D5F 8951

On Thu, 2005-20-10 at 15:26 +0200, Dan Armak wrote:
> On Thursday 20 October 2005 09:11, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > Metabuilds should be forthcoming shortly. I'd appreciate input on
> > http://dev.gentoo.org/~spyderous/xorg-x11/metabuilds.txt and in
> > particular from people on the GNOME and KDE teams.
>
> We'll also need to educate them about xorg-x11 not installing fonts any
> longer. The way I understood your metabuilds.txt, 'emerge xorg-x11 kde' would
> result in an unusable system without any fonts at all...

If this is the case, xorg-x11 should pull in at least minimal fonts
(fixed, etc).

--
Olivier Crête
tester@gentoo.org
x86 Security Liaison

Am Donnerstag, den 20.10.2005, 00:11 -0700 schrieb Donnie Berkholz:
> Thanks to the dedicated work of Joshua Baergen and me, you've got just
> what you asked for -- newer X than even money can buy. Pound on it, test
> it, break it, and file bugs. Let us know how it works.
>
I had some issues updating xorg-server on amd64, it turns out
eselect-opengl was pointing /usr/include/GL/glxproto.h towards the emul
headers. Which, don't contain some changes needed for the later modular
builds. I filed bug #109922 about this issue.

Apart from that, everything I had installed for modular updated
successfully.

The only issue I've encountered so far is that XKB appears to be
completely broken for me. I can't quite track down why at this stage.

Thanks guys for the quick work in updating the ebuilds!
Ben.

On Thursday 20 October 2005 14:26, Dan Armak wrote:
> To keep the current behaviour, the kde metaebuild (and gnome and the other
> WMs) would have to depend on xorg-x11, which strictly speaking is
> unnecessary. Opinions? How can we educate the users to manually 'emerge
> xorg-x11'? Personally I'm in favor of updating the docs, making a big
> announcement on all channels, and preparing a nice bug to close duplicates
> against.
>
> We'll also need to educate them about xorg-x11 not installing fonts any
> longer. The way I understood your metabuilds.txt, 'emerge xorg-x11 kde'
> would result in an unusable system without any fonts at all...

As a fairly average joe user when it comes to all things X, I feel it would be
best to keep the current X USE flag behaviour, i.e. a full working Xserver.
The same goes for xorg-x11, or virtual/x11.
KDE needs some X libs, so obviously must always depend on them, but having the
X USE set should call in a complete working server.

For packages that can work with, or without X, and should give the option to
have a full server, or not, perhaps a new USE flag is needed? Xlibs?

--
Mike Williams
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Dan Armak wrote:
> On Thursday 20 October 2005 09:11, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> To keep the current behaviour, the kde metaebuild (and gnome and the other
> WMs) would have to depend on xorg-x11, which strictly speaking is
> unnecessary. Opinions? How can we educate the users to manually 'emerge
> xorg-x11'? Personally I'm in favor of updating the docs, making a big
> announcement on all channels, and preparing a nice bug to close duplicates
> against.
>
> We'll also need to educate them about xorg-x11 not installing fonts any
> longer. The way I understood your metabuilds.txt, 'emerge xorg-x11 kde' would
> result in an unusable system without any fonts at all...
>

a useflag could solve the issue as well a all inclusive metaebuild for X.


--

Luca Barbato

Gentoo/linux Developer Gentoo/PPC Operational Leader
http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

On Fri, 2005-10-21 at 01:46 +1100, Ben Skeggs wrote:
> The only issue I've encountered so far is that XKB appears to be
> completely broken for me. I can't quite track down why at this stage.

bug 109926

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

On Thursday 20 October 2005 17:23, Mike Williams wrote:
> On Thursday 20 October 2005 14:26, Dan Armak wrote:
> > To keep the current behaviour, the kde metaebuild (and gnome and the
> > other WMs) would have to depend on xorg-x11, which strictly speaking is
> > unnecessary. Opinions? How can we educate the users to manually 'emerge
> > xorg-x11'? Personally I'm in favor of updating the docs, making a big
> > announcement on all channels, and preparing a nice bug to close
> > duplicates against.
> >
> > We'll also need to educate them about xorg-x11 not installing fonts any
> > longer. The way I understood your metabuilds.txt, 'emerge xorg-x11 kde'
> > would result in an unusable system without any fonts at all...
>
> As a fairly average joe user when it comes to all things X, I feel it would
> be best to keep the current X USE flag behaviour, i.e. a full working
> Xserver. The same goes for xorg-x11, or virtual/x11.
That's not the meaning of the flag. Its meaning is 'enable optional X11
support'. Usually (almost always) this means client X support.

For apps that really have optional support for the xorg-x11 server, a new USE
flag might be introduced.

> KDE needs some X libs, so obviously must always depend on them, but having
> the X USE set should call in a complete working server.
>
> For packages that can work with, or without X, and should give the option
> to have a full server, or not, perhaps a new USE flag is needed? Xlibs?
No. That would change the meaning of the X USE flag. We could add a new USE
flag, but we shouldn't rename existing ones.

In any case, the decision of optional clientside X support (the X USE flag
today) should be completely separate from the decision of installing a local
X server.

--
Dan Armak
Gentoo Linux developer (KDE)
Public GPG key: http://dev.gentoo.org/~danarmak/danarmak-gpg-public.key
Fingerprint: DD70 DBF9 E3D4 6CB9 2FDD 0069 508D 9143 8D5F 8951

On Thursday 20 October 2005 17:28, Luca Barbato wrote:
> Dan Armak wrote:
> > On Thursday 20 October 2005 09:11, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > To keep the current behaviour, the kde metaebuild (and gnome and the
> > other WMs) would have to depend on xorg-x11, which strictly speaking is
> > unnecessary. Opinions? How can we educate the users to manually 'emerge
> > xorg-x11'? Personally I'm in favor of updating the docs, making a big
> > announcement on all channels, and preparing a nice bug to close
> > duplicates against.
> >
> > We'll also need to educate them about xorg-x11 not installing fonts any
> > longer. The way I understood your metabuilds.txt, 'emerge xorg-x11 kde'
> > would result in an unusable system without any fonts at all...
>
> a useflag could solve the issue as well a all inclusive metaebuild for X.
To solve this issue it would have to be an on-by-default flag, i.e.
'noxserver'. I know some people are strongly against nofoo flags.

Also, we'd have to include RDEPEND="!noxserver? ( x11-base/xorg-x11 )" in
every ebuild in the tree being updated to depend on x11-base/xorg-libs. Or an
eclass to the same effect. This would be easily forgotten in new ebuilds, and
then we'd get inconsistent behavior.

--
Dan Armak
Gentoo Linux developer (KDE)
Public GPG key: http://dev.gentoo.org/~danarmak/danarmak-gpg-public.key
Fingerprint: DD70 DBF9 E3D4 6CB9 2FDD 0069 508D 9143 8D5F 8951

Am Donnerstag, den 20.10.2005, 16:28 +0100 schrieb Herbie Hopkins:
> On Fri, 2005-10-21 at 01:46 +1100, Ben Skeggs wrote:
> > The only issue I've encountered so far is that XKB appears to be
> > completely broken for me. I can't quite track down why at this stage.
>
> bug 109926
>
Thanks! That got rid of the XKB error messages in Xorg.0.log. But.. I
still can't VT switch and the "windows" keys don't work at all either :(

On Thursday 20 October 2005 09:11, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Metabuilds should be forthcoming shortly. I'd appreciate input on
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~spyderous/xorg-x11/metabuilds.txt and in
> particular from people on the GNOME and KDE teams.

Don't forget a new virtual/x11-libs.

And we'll need to update the entire tree to depend on that instead of
virtual/x11.

--
Dan Armak
Gentoo Linux developer (KDE)
Public GPG key: http://dev.gentoo.org/~danarmak/danarmak-gpg-public.key
Fingerprint: DD70 DBF9 E3D4 6CB9 2FDD 0069 508D 9143 8D5F 8951

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Dan Armak wrote:
| KDE doesn't have any special requirements. It doesn't use any kind of X11
| build tool (what is there other than imake?). It does use some X apps
like
| xmessage, xset etc. After you commit your metaebuilds we'll update the
deps
| as needed. The only metaebuild we'll need to depend on is -libs.

I'd prefer that people don't come to depend on metabuilds at all. See
http://dev.gentoo.org/~spyderous/xorg-x11/porting_to_modular_x_howto.txt.

| However, consider this usecase: user (who's used to the old docs)
installs new
| stage3, types 'emerge kde', runs kdm... oops, no X server...
|
| To keep the current behaviour, the kde metaebuild (and gnome and the
other
| WMs) would have to depend on xorg-x11, which strictly speaking is
| unnecessary. Opinions? How can we educate the users to manually 'emerge
| xorg-x11'? Personally I'm in favor of updating the docs, making a big
| announcement on all channels, and preparing a nice bug to close
duplicates
| against.

Couple of ideas here.

1) We do as you suggest, and make people emerge xorg-x11
2) KDE could add a USE=X and dep X? ( xorg-server )

| We'll also need to educate them about xorg-x11 not installing fonts any
| longer. The way I understood your metabuilds.txt, 'emerge xorg-x11
kde' would
| result in an unusable system without any fonts at all...

We will still install some fonts, but not all, and I'll note that in the
metabuilds text.

Thanks for the comments,
Donnie
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDV+PhXVaO67S1rtsRAryFAJ4rQJ1FNcnDDiw0gYDAhUwGPFx9vACeOGor
uc7ieRH+D73hVLXt8hxAJF4=
=MNDF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Dan Armak wrote:
| On Thursday 20 October 2005 09:11, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
|
|>Metabuilds should be forthcoming shortly. I'd appreciate input on
|>http://dev.gentoo.org/~spyderous/xorg-x11/metabuilds.txt and in
|>particular from people on the GNOME and KDE teams.
|
|
| Don't forget a new virtual/x11-libs.
|
| And we'll need to update the entire tree to depend on that instead of
| virtual/x11.

Again, I'll point to the porting guide.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDV+RgXVaO67S1rtsRAqq9AKDZ9jI7KeLCl+3rH4D/GU0fjWbVbQCePc8A
mcxaDlhUStCFTnvn3R3U1Lo=
=tAko
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Dan Armak wrote:
| On Thursday 20 October 2005 17:28, Luca Barbato wrote:
|>a useflag could solve the issue as well a all inclusive metaebuild for X.
|
| To solve this issue it would have to be an on-by-default flag, i.e.
| 'noxserver'. I know some people are strongly against nofoo flags.

Or, you could just activate it in the base profile.

| Also, we'd have to include RDEPEND="!noxserver? ( x11-base/xorg-x11 )" in
| every ebuild in the tree being updated to depend on
x11-base/xorg-libs. Or an
| eclass to the same effect. This would be easily forgotten in new
ebuilds, and
| then we'd get inconsistent behavior.

That's a good point. Any ideas on how to deal with it?

Thanks,
Donnie
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDV+VJXVaO67S1rtsRAoLsAJ0aiEOHDnpTJ/8vM5ImM23qmz1oXwCeLgG4
LVQZG0Vp/BG5IiAw5IlYc7Q=
=jMQO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

On 10/20/05, Dan Armak <danarmak@gentoo.org> wrote:
> To solve this issue it would have to be an on-by-default flag, i.e.
> 'noxserver'. I know some people are strongly against nofoo flags.

What about an off-by-default 'xserver' flag?

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

On Thursday 20 October 2005 20:37, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> I'd prefer that people don't come to depend on metabuilds at all.
OK, we can do this.

> See
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~spyderous/xorg-x11/porting_to_modular_x_howto.txt.
That file says there won't be any x11-related virtuals anymore. Are you sure
no package uses it in the sense of 'any X server' instead of 'any X client
libs+headers'?

> Couple of ideas here.
>
> 1) We do as you suggest, and make people emerge xorg-x11
> 2) KDE could add a USE=X and dep X? ( xorg-server )

(2) is bad for several reasons:

Firstly, as I said in my other replies, this would change the current meaning
of the X USE flag. The original meaning would stay without a flag.

Today it means 'enable support for clienside X11'. You want to make it mean
'install X11 server'. If I'm building a headless box without an X11 server,
but I do want to emerge KDE and run it over ssh -Y from another box, I need
two useflags to specify this. But even if we introduce a new USE flag
'Xserver', on by default where X is on by default, and used as you describe
above, the problems I describe below will remain.

Secondly, there can be more than one X11 server (kdrive, etc). Depending on
xorg-server is bad. If anything, we should introduce a virtual/x11-server.

Thirdly, it's a 'convenience dep': whether xorg-server is installed or not
won't affect the behavior of KDE in any way (given a working DISPLAY
setting).

Finally, it requires that extra change to (ideally) all X11 client apps. It's
not intuitive, and so easy to forget when writing new ebuilds.

> We will still install some fonts, but not all, and I'll note that in the
> metabuilds text.
Which ones? Selected how? I'm asking because I don't want to work too hard on
deciding which fonts KDE should depend on :-)

--
Dan Armak
Gentoo Linux developer (KDE)
Public GPG key: http://dev.gentoo.org/~danarmak/danarmak-gpg-public.key
Fingerprint: DD70 DBF9 E3D4 6CB9 2FDD 0069 508D 9143 8D5F 8951

On Thursday 20 October 2005 20:58, Matthijs van der Vleuten wrote:
> On 10/20/05, Dan Armak <danarmak@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > To solve this issue it would have to be an on-by-default flag, i.e.
> > 'noxserver'. I know some people are strongly against nofoo flags.
>
> What about an off-by-default 'xserver' flag?
It wouldn't solve the problem at hand.

Without any flag at all, the user needs to 'emerge xorg-x11' manually to get
eg KDE to run locally. With an off-by-default flag, he needs to set it on
manually, _before_ installing KDE, to get an xorg-x11 server. As long as he
needs to do something manually, explicitly, it should just be an 'emerge
xorg-x11', which after all is a very simple operation.

--
Dan Armak
Gentoo Linux developer (KDE)
Public GPG key: http://dev.gentoo.org/~danarmak/danarmak-gpg-public.key
Fingerprint: DD70 DBF9 E3D4 6CB9 2FDD 0069 508D 9143 8D5F 8951

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Dan Armak wrote:
| On Thursday 20 October 2005 20:37, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
|
|>I'd prefer that people don't come to depend on metabuilds at all.
|
| OK, we can do this.
|
|
|>See
|>http://dev.gentoo.org/~spyderous/xorg-x11/porting_to_modular_x_howto.txt.
|
| That file says there won't be any x11-related virtuals anymore. Are
you sure
| no package uses it in the sense of 'any X server' instead of 'any X
client
| libs+headers'?

I'm not aware of any. The only similar thing I'm aware of is a few
incredibly broken packages that require Xvfb at build time.

If there are packages that need to run any X server at build time,
they're even more broken.

| Firstly, as I said in my other replies, this would change the current
meaning
| of the X USE flag. The original meaning would stay without a flag.
|
| Today it means 'enable support for clienside X11'. You want to make it
mean
| 'install X11 server'. If I'm building a headless box without an X11
server,
| but I do want to emerge KDE and run it over ssh -Y from another box, I
need
| two useflags to specify this. But even if we introduce a new USE flag
| 'Xserver', on by default where X is on by default, and used as you
describe
| above, the problems I describe below will remain.

Does it really mean that? How about all of the X USE flags in font
ebuilds? They mean basically what I'm saying.

| Secondly, there can be more than one X11 server (kdrive, etc).
Depending on
| xorg-server is bad. If anything, we should introduce a virtual/x11-server.
|
| Thirdly, it's a 'convenience dep': whether xorg-server is installed or
not
| won't affect the behavior of KDE in any way (given a working DISPLAY
| setting).

Right, the intent is to basically say "I'm part of the 90% of users who
has X installed locally and wants things to just work."

| Finally, it requires that extra change to (ideally) all X11 client
apps. It's
| not intuitive, and so easy to forget when writing new ebuilds.

Yeah.


|>We will still install some fonts, but not all, and I'll note that in the
|>metabuilds text.
|
| Which ones? Selected how? I'm asking because I don't want to work too
hard on
| deciding which fonts KDE should depend on :-)

Selected arbitrarily by the x11 team based on requirement, common use
and prettiness factor. Probably font-misc-misc, font-bh-ttf,
font-adobe-utopia-type1 and maybe some others that are brought to my
attention.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDV+1NXVaO67S1rtsRAlmXAJ4zr0ZCvF29BZwmDv/n/iagMMkIpgCgyO2h
lckxp/jpUG4FZxr0PQQAyjQ=
=x7RY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

On Thursday 20 October 2005 20:43, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> - gpg control packet
>
> Dan Armak wrote:
> | On Thursday 20 October 2005 17:28, Luca Barbato wrote:
> |>a useflag could solve the issue as well a all inclusive metaebuild for X.
> |
> | To solve this issue it would have to be an on-by-default flag, i.e.
> | 'noxserver'. I know some people are strongly against nofoo flags.
>
> Or, you could just activate it in the base profile.
True. I forget - why can't we solve the problem of all nofoo USE flags this
way? Or is the (remaining) problem only with local flags?

--
Dan Armak
Gentoo Linux developer (KDE)
Public GPG key: http://dev.gentoo.org/~danarmak/danarmak-gpg-public.key
Fingerprint: DD70 DBF9 E3D4 6CB9 2FDD 0069 508D 9143 8D5F 8951

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Dan Armak wrote:
| On Thursday 20 October 2005 20:43, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
|>Or, you could just activate it in the base profile.
|
| True. I forget - why can't we solve the problem of all nofoo USE flags
this
| way? Or is the (remaining) problem only with local flags?

Some people have issues with adding local flags to profiles. As for the
others, I dunno. Maybe they're just too lazy to get their flag in profiles.

Thanks,
Donnie
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDV/CdXVaO67S1rtsRArZhAKDhNOuRs24Fh5B4kiB3+FC3FYHY2gCg3b4l
9HULcG30xudaDdwsOwV9xJg=
=zLAN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 21:35:39 +0200 "Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò"
<flameeyes@gentoo.org> wrote:
| On Thursday 20 October 2005 21:25, Dan Armak wrote:
| > True. I forget - why can't we solve the problem of all nofoo USE
| > flags this way? Or is the (remaining) problem only with local flags?
| Too many people using -* (due to auto flags) so that will break for
| most of them.

People using -* will just have to deal with the consequences...

--
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron)
Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org
Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm

On Thursday 20 October 2005 21:25, Dan Armak wrote:
> True. I forget - why can't we solve the problem of all nofoo USE flags this
> way? Or is the (remaining) problem only with local flags?
Too many people using -* (due to auto flags) so that will break for most of
them.
It's one of the reasons we have nocxx for example (you see how many people
would break with -cxx on useflags? :P).

--
Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/
Gentoo/ALT lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, AMD64, Sound, PAM, KDE

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
| On Thursday 20 October 2005 21:25, Dan Armak wrote:
|
|>True. I forget - why can't we solve the problem of all nofoo USE flags
this
|>way? Or is the (remaining) problem only with local flags?
|
| Too many people using -* (due to auto flags) so that will break for
most of
| them.
| It's one of the reasons we have nocxx for example (you see how many
people
| would break with -cxx on useflags? :P).

I think you're missing the context. He's saying we solve the nofoo
problem by adding foo to profiles instead, not by adding nofoo.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDV/MmXVaO67S1rtsRAh1HAJ4+StXYt4k/ylB5bd3b7v9wPjgnAQCdHleY
RElr49K+bgam51S/ZHJlUzo=
=34il
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list