Maybe this should be a more general bug report but I just encountered it with mldonkey. A friend of mine who just started with linux wanted to merge mldonkey on a server without X, so he obviously put -X into his USE flags. Unfotunately mldonkey has a gtk?. He doesn't know about gtk as he just started using linux on the server nothing more and of course it doesn't build. The gtk? should be surrounded by a X?. Maybe all USE flags that also depend on X, like gtk, gnome, kde ... should be automatically surrounded by a X?, so that it is not neccessary to do it in every ebuild. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Put -X in USE but not -gtk 2. emerge mldonkey on a server without X Actual Results: merging "gtkglarea-1.2.3-r1" ... > checking OpenGL... no > checking Mesa... no > checking Mesa with pthreads... no > configure: error: You need GL or MesaGL libraries Expected Results: Don't build anything depending on gtk/X.
ok, a couple things, if your friend wants a non-X server, he needs to include in his USE flags: USE="-gtk -qt" as that should disable any optional graphics libraries that would require X to be installed. Secondly, is this a compile error with gtkglarea or mldonkey? Certainly there should not be errors as the one you ran into, I just need to know which package caused the ./configure error, mldonkey, or gtkglarea.
Your point being? If you say -X you _want_ -X. I don't think it is apropriate to go searching for all the USE flags that might pull in X related stuff when you already have a -X. How should a newcomer to linux know what gtk and qt are and that he has to put those into USE too when he just doens't want _any_ X related stuff? I know that, you know that, but not everyone will. The error is from gtkglarea.
Since this isn't a net-p2p bug, I'm assigning it back to bug wranglers for better sorting.
why the heck does gnome get this.. ? (@bugwranglers) @ reporter : This is not a bug to start with : X USE flag is for X specific extensions. gtk USE flag is for optional gtk support. gtk doesn't necessarily imply X (well in reality it does, but theoretical). So someone who wants no X components should disable all relevant USE flags (qt,kde,gtk,gnome,etc.) , not just -X. That is just the way it is. @ maintainers : i was sort of horrified by the metadata , caleb are you really implieing you gave maintainership to a non-gentoo dev ? That's pretty pointless, i mean he can't maintain it for sure, he has no access... will you please fix that. closing invalid because of stated reason
Thanks for the clarification, foser. I would be happy to explicityly maintain it (<email>squinky86@gentoo.org</email>), or just have <herd>net-p2p</herd> without the extra maintainer information. Any objections to removing Julian from metadata.xml and putting me there instead?
I see absolutely no reason to assign this to gnome either. If someone is to fix this, then in the mldonkey ebuild with an X? { gtk? (gtkglarea) } style entry. As for the X USE flag, I do think this is broken as you stated: You need X for gtk ... But maybe this is a more general discussion.
No objections. The "maintainership" was done that was solely because he supplied ebuilds for it that I wasn't able to answer questions to.
@ Alexander : No, that is the point I was making : you don't need X for gtk (there are known working win32 & curses backends). Those possible backends are not currently in Gentoo, but it is not impossible that they get introduced in the future. But that is just an example of why you shouldn't generalize one USE flag to include another. Even if it was purely a theoretical situation it still wouldn't be wise to implement it like you suggested, because it requires knowledge that is not relevant to package itself. The package only knows that it can use gtk, not that gtk uses X.
