On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 10:17 PM, Sebastian Pipping <sping@gentoo.org> wrote:
> I am not sure what you are suggesting for change, though:
>
> *(A) Removing use flag ccache altogether?
>
> * * * That could result in the uninstallation of the
> * * * ccache package if it was the sole dependency of catalyst.
> * * * Correct?

Indeed, emerge --prune would remove ccache.

> *(B) Remove the sed magic only?
>
> * * * That would remove the comfort of automatic addition
> * * * of option ccache. *Any gains?
>
> *(C) Something else?

I might suggest removing all ccache-related stuff in the ebuild and
adding a few einfo lines to the ebuild suggesting to the user to
emerge ccache (so that it'll be in @world) and how to modify
catalyst.conf to enable it. Do you think that would be OK?

It just seems like the USE flag is the wrong way of doing this.

(I'm so glad to see you working on catalyst. I've got a number of
patches that I need to commit, especially now that I see some other
activity)

Thanks!
Matt

On 06/25/2011 05:55 AM, Matt Turner wrote:
> I might suggest removing all ccache-related stuff in the ebuild and
> adding a few einfo lines to the ebuild suggesting to the user to
> emerge ccache (so that it'll be in @world) and how to modify
> catalyst.conf to enable it. Do you think that would be OK?
>
> It just seems like the USE flag is the wrong way of doing this.

I don't know. dev-util/metro seems to pull in ccache in a similar way.
I would love to hear a third voice on this.


> (I'm so glad to see you working on catalyst. I've got a number of
> patches that I need to commit, especially now that I see some other
> activity)

Please go ahead.

Best,



Sebastian