I do not know if this was proposed earlier, but I noticed, that USE="sqlite" seems to just pull in any dev-db/sqlite (in many cases not really any, but the one supported/the one the dev added), while sqlite3 pulls in dev-db/sqlite-3* In my humble opinion it would be nice to have a greater degree of control by separating this into two useflags, sqlite2 and sqlite3, just like e.g. qt3 and qt4 Reproducible: Always
Benedikt, we have gentoo-dev mailing list [1] for similar debates, not bugzilla; please take it there. Thanks. http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/lists.xml
*** Bug 215114 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
So there was a discussion[1] about this. And, it predates this bug. I don't understand why this bug was closed. First of all, it's aberrant behavior and that behavior hasn't been rectified. Maybe bugzilla isn't the forum for discussion of a solution (although I don't see why not), but that doesn't mean that the bug is invalid or otherwise resolved. Closing it and saying "discuss elsewhere" just makes it all that more difficult to find these types of issues when searching bugzilla. Please reopen and allow the discussion/issue to be visible. [1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/51611
Once again, if you are unhappy with the outcome of the previous debate on ML, then take it there. Bugzilla completely sucks for debates.
Actually, I'm relatively happy with the outcome of the debate. The (limited) discussion fizzled out with Doug Goldstein saying[1]: >> how about 'sqlite' means you want sqlite irregardless of version ... then >> sqlite-2 either gets punted from apr-util or it gets a local USE >> flag 'sqlite-old' for older cruft > > I agree with this. > ... > I'm willing to start making this change asap in the tree. I'm not disagreeing with his sentiment, nor am I trying to have the implementation discussion here. I'm pointing out that this work still isn't done and as such, I consider the current behavior a bug. Since there are at least two Gentoo developers who agree with me (see previously reference links to gentoo-dev), this seems like a valid bug. [1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/51670
