The biggest drawback I have experienced after switching from Gentoo as main dist to Funtoo is that often there are USE-flags missing descriptions.
Right now for example there is a "sys-apps/openrc-0.18.3" where one might wonder what the flags "netifrc", "newnet" and "tools" does, but if we do... we have to read the .ebuild-file to try to guess what those USE-flags actually do.
Output from "equery u sys-apps/openrc"
[ Legend : U - final flag setting for installation] [ : I - package is installed with flag ] [ Colors : set, unset ] * Found these USE flags for sys-apps/openrc-0.18.3: U I - - audit : Enable support for Linux audit subsystem using sys-process/audit - - debug : Enable extra debug codepaths, like asserts and extra output. If you want to get meaningful backtraces see https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Quality_Assurance/Backtraces + + ncurses : Add ncurses support (console display library) - - netifrc : <unknown> - - newnet : <unknown> + + pam : Add support for PAM (Pluggable Authentication Modules) - DANGEROUS to arbitrarily flip - - static-libs : Build static versions of dynamic libraries as well - - tools : <unknown> + + unicode : Add support for Unicode
This is just an example out of many similar cases I have encountered since I made the switch, on several machines.
It makes each world-update a potentially huge source-diving chore with needlessly high potential for errors if the user misunderstands or guesses wrong.
The point of having the ability to make choices is to a large part lost if the user isn't able to make an informed choice.
It definitely should be prioritized to at least provide a sentence or two about what a USE-flag does, if it's worth the time to make the flag itself. On these grounds, new USE-flags without an informative description should be rejected in my opinion.
Question
b9AcE
The biggest drawback I have experienced after switching from Gentoo as main dist to Funtoo is that often there are USE-flags missing descriptions.
Right now for example there is a "sys-apps/openrc-0.18.3" where one might wonder what the flags "netifrc", "newnet" and "tools" does, but if we do... we have to read the .ebuild-file to try to guess what those USE-flags actually do.
Output from "equery u sys-apps/openrc"
This is just an example out of many similar cases I have encountered since I made the switch, on several machines.
It makes each world-update a potentially huge source-diving chore with needlessly high potential for errors if the user misunderstands or guesses wrong.
The point of having the ability to make choices is to a large part lost if the user isn't able to make an informed choice.
It definitely should be prioritized to at least provide a sentence or two about what a USE-flag does, if it's worth the time to make the flag itself. On these grounds, new USE-flags without an informative description should be rejected in my opinion.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
2 answers to this question
Recommended Posts