Seems that the "crypt" USE flag for hal clashes with global variety - in an annoying way. Global: Add support for encryption -- using mcrypt or gpg where applicable Local: Allows HAL to mount volumes that are encrypted using LUKS. sys-fs/cryptsetup-luks which has recently been renamed to sys-fs/cryptsetup allows you to create such encrypted volumes. HAL will be able to handle volumes that are removable or fixed. Reproducible: Always
The global use flag description is busted. As you may know, local use flag descriptions extend and add precision over the global USE flag. Is this still a problem for you ?
I'd say it is still a problem. It causes excess spam for users who don't need LUKS. To me, the global and local descriptions vary enough in this case that it is a nuisance for users.
I see no problem with current description. Please bring this to gentoo-dev mailing list if you want to pursue argumentation as such a change would clearly apply to a lot of other packages using the crypt USE flag. I suggest searching for preceeding discussions about the usefulness of having zillion of use flags to describe somewhat similar enabled features in packages on the same mailing list first.
*** Bug 299578 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
(In reply to comment #3) > I see no problem with current description. ahem, the other bug 299578 is not about description but about the functionality behind the use flag ... and also this is how I'd understand this bug, until you started talk about descriptions - Ken says the USE flags clash, not "the decriptions of" the use flag clash (yes, they do, but it is only a part of the problem) > Please bring this to gentoo-dev mailing list if you want to pursue > argumentation as such a change would clearly apply to a lot of other packages > using the crypt USE flag. well, I'm not getting the point of it ... gentoo-dev - General Gentoo developer discussion mailing list ... why do you ask _users_ to join _developers_ list? if you feel this needs a discussion on a developer mailinglist then it is your responsibility to initiate it - we want a bug fixed (or a feature enhanced, depends on a point of view), we don't want to chat on mailinglists since you are a Gentoo developer, you are somehow obliged to fix the bugs if you can, i.e. do what it needs to fix them, not to tell others to do it while you volunteer to be a Gentoo developer (I suppose), we have no right to force you to do anything, and we are grateful for every bit you do for us, the users, but still you can't dodge the responsibility in such a way > I suggest searching for preceeding discussions about the usefulness of having > zillion of use flags I have found nothing relevant ... well, maybe it's just that I usually use wrong keywords (no, "zillion" did not work for me :-)), but it'd be nice to provide some links, 'cause "search" is not an argument > to describe somewhat similar enabled features in packages on the same mailing > list first. to me, "somewhat similar" in this case sounds like "hey, let's join gtk and qt use flags into one called gui, it is similar, oh, and while at it, let's replace also X with gui, it just means that the user wants graphical support"
