FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Gentoo > Gentoo Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 03-12-2010, 12:18 PM
Robert Bradbury
 
Default Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

It would appear that the pending (0321) mask of Qt3 will break sci-misc/qcad, sci-chemistry/xdrawchem and x11-misc/glunarclock.

These are fairly significant science packages for which there are no current (qt4) or "equivalent" packages.* While on one hand it may not do much harm to mask Qt3 based games packages (which I believe has already been done), it is entirely another thing when one goes masking significant science packages for which there may be no substitutes (e.g. qcad and xdrawchem).


So, an end user (e.g. a Gentoo user who is not a Gentoo developer) is forced to ask:
a) Has research been done to determine whether there are replacements for these packages and why aren't they suggested in the mask comments?

b) If one is forced to run Qt3 in order to support these older packages, is there *good* documentation on how to do this (and why isn't this suggested in the mask comments)?

While I am in general in favor of migrating to the most recent packages, there are cases where packages will still work reliably well with older libraries (and would likely work forever if there were "static" build options).* So before there is a rush to remove ebuilds it should be asked whether it is possible to produce a static build and/or whether there is a clear path provided for the retention of "legacy" packages?


Thank you,
Robert Bradbury
 
Old 03-12-2010, 02:46 PM
Denis Dupeyron
 
Default Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 6:18 AM, Robert Bradbury
<robert.bradbury@gmail.com> wrote:
> It would appear that the pending (0321) mask of Qt3 will break
> sci-misc/qcad, sci-chemistry/xdrawchem and x11-misc/glunarclock.

I'm not concerned but I feel sympathy for those who use these packages
and many others. The decision from the qt project to remove qt3 and
all its dependencies from the tree is suboptimal to say the least. A
library project should be at the service of those using the library,
not dictating to those using it.

That said they were perfectly entitled to make the decision of not
wanting to maintain qt3 any longer. The only advice I can give is that
all disgruntled users and developers create a qt3 project and
adopt/unmask/re-commit the qt3 libraries for maintainers of packages
who need it. I doubt this will happen as this could have been done a
long time ago, but it's never too late.

Denis.
 
Old 03-12-2010, 02:59 PM
Alexis Ballier
 
Default Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 08:46:34 -0700
Denis Dupeyron <calchan@gentoo.org> wrote:

[...]
> That said they were perfectly entitled to make the decision of not
> wanting to maintain qt3 any longer. The only advice I can give is that
> all disgruntled users and developers create a qt3 project and
> adopt/unmask/re-commit the qt3 libraries for maintainers of packages
> who need it. I doubt this will happen as this could have been done a
> long time ago, but it's never too late.

Or like the old gtk-1: completely abandon the package and let the
consumers upgrade slowly. IMHO this is the less annoying approach for
everyone.


Alexis.
 
Old 03-12-2010, 03:17 PM
Fabian Groffen
 
Default Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

On 12-03-2010 08:46:34 -0700, Denis Dupeyron wrote:
> That said they were perfectly entitled to make the decision of not
> wanting to maintain qt3 any longer. The only advice I can give is that
> all disgruntled users and developers create a qt3 project and
> adopt/unmask/re-commit the qt3 libraries for maintainers of packages
> who need it. I doubt this will happen as this could have been done a
> long time ago, but it's never too late.

Didn't we have a graveyard thing/overlay somewhere some day? Some users
might happily prefer to use stuff that's treecleaned, or removed due
security issues. If removal of stuff would mean it's dumped in there it
can be easily used by users and more easily readded later afterwards, if
need arises.


--
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level
 
Old 03-12-2010, 03:30 PM
Gilles Dartiguelongue
 
Default Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

Le vendredi 12 mars 2010 à 16:59 +0100, Alexis Ballier a écrit :
> On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 08:46:34 -0700
> Denis Dupeyron <calchan@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> [...]
> > That said they were perfectly entitled to make the decision of not
> > wanting to maintain qt3 any longer. The only advice I can give is that
> > all disgruntled users and developers create a qt3 project and
> > adopt/unmask/re-commit the qt3 libraries for maintainers of packages
> > who need it. I doubt this will happen as this could have been done a
> > long time ago, but it's never too late.
>
> Or like the old gtk-1: completely abandon the package and let the
> consumers upgrade slowly. IMHO this is the less annoying approach for
> everyone.

Well the discussion about dropping glib-1 and gtk-1 pops up once in a
while in the herd. The removal hasn't been done yet because we focus
more on packages that pops most on bugzilla for example.

--
Gilles Dartiguelongue <eva@gentoo.org>
Gentoo
 
Old 03-12-2010, 03:41 PM
justin
 
Default Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

On 12/03/10 17:17, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 12-03-2010 08:46:34 -0700, Denis Dupeyron wrote:
>> That said they were perfectly entitled to make the decision of not
>> wanting to maintain qt3 any longer. The only advice I can give is that
>> all disgruntled users and developers create a qt3 project and
>> adopt/unmask/re-commit the qt3 libraries for maintainers of packages
>> who need it. I doubt this will happen as this could have been done a
>> long time ago, but it's never too late.
>
> Didn't we have a graveyard thing/overlay somewhere some day? Some users
> might happily prefer to use stuff that's treecleaned, or removed due
> security issues. If removal of stuff would mean it's dumped in there it
> can be easily used by users and more easily readded later afterwards, if
> need arises.
>
>

As we have the "overlay depend on overlay" support now, we could easily
put those packages into the sci overlay, if there would be a qt3
support/lib overlay.
 
Old 03-12-2010, 04:24 PM
Maciej Mrozowski
 
Default Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

On Friday 12 of March 2010 17:17:01 Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 12-03-2010 08:46:34 -0700, Denis Dupeyron wrote:
> > That said they were perfectly entitled to make the decision of not
> > wanting to maintain qt3 any longer. The only advice I can give is that
> > all disgruntled users and developers create a qt3 project and
> > adopt/unmask/re-commit the qt3 libraries for maintainers of packages
> > who need it. I doubt this will happen as this could have been done a
> > long time ago, but it's never too late.
>
> Didn't we have a graveyard thing/overlay somewhere some day? Some users
> might happily prefer to use stuff that's treecleaned, or removed due
> security issues. If removal of stuff would mean it's dumped in there it
> can be easily used by users and more easily readded later afterwards, if
> need arises.

Yes, it's called kde-sunset and it contains KDE3 and should contain Qt3
applications (maybe it does, may not all of them though) removed from tree
recently. It's not graveyard really as some users actively maintain this
overlay.

http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/kde-sunset.git
(layman -a kde-sunset)

--
regards
MM
 
Old 03-12-2010, 04:29 PM
Ben de Groot
 
Default Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

On 12 March 2010 14:18, Robert Bradbury <robert.bradbury@gmail.com> wrote:
> It would appear that the pending (0321) mask of Qt3 will break
> sci-misc/qcad, sci-chemistry/xdrawchem and x11-misc/glunarclock.

The mask has already been in place since March 1st.

> a) Has research been done to determine whether there are replacements for
> these packages and why aren't they suggested in the mask comments?

See the discussion in the relevant bugs and on the forums. For qcad
see bug #284896 and for xdrawchem bug #299588. Glunarclock is
unrelated.

> b) If one is forced to run Qt3 in order to support these older packages, is
> there *good* documentation on how to do this (and why isn't this
> suggested in the mask comments)?

Because package.mask is not the right place for documentation.
It does refer to bug #283429, the tracker bug for the Qt3 mask and
removal. This in turn refers to our announcement [1] which mentions
that Qt3 and packages depending on it will remain available in the
community-maintained kde-sunset overlay.

> So before there is a rush to remove ebuilds it should be asked
> whether it is possible to produce a static build and/or whether there is a
> clear path provided for the retention of "legacy" packages?

There is no rush. We first announced this in July 2009 [2] and then
again in December [1]. We have given every opportunity to find
appropriate upgrade paths. As mentioned, users who for some
reason need or want to keep using legacy packages can use the
kde-sunset overlay.


1: http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev-announce/msg_f295c1c2d9d70238d289de3a7ed5bf5c.xml
2: http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev-announce/msg_d851e05567d538b662f34de8dfdb7316.xml

Cheers,
--
Ben de Groot
Gentoo Linux developer (qt, media, lxde, desktop-misc)
__________________________________________________ ____
 
Old 03-12-2010, 04:33 PM
Ben de Groot
 
Default Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

On 12 March 2010 16:59, Alexis Ballier <aballier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Or like the old gtk-1: completely abandon the package and let the
> consumers upgrade slowly. IMHO this is the less annoying approach for
> everyone.

Abandoned packages do not belong in the portage tree. That's
why we have a treecleaners project.

Cheers,
--
Ben de Groot
Gentoo Linux developer (qt, media, lxde, desktop-misc)
__________________________________________________ ____
 
Old 03-12-2010, 10:07 PM
Ryan Hill
 
Default Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 18:33:12 +0100
Ben de Groot <yngwin@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On 12 March 2010 16:59, Alexis Ballier <aballier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > Or like the old gtk-1: completely abandon the package and let the
> > consumers upgrade slowly. IMHO this is the less annoying approach for
> > everyone.
>
> Abandoned packages do not belong in the portage tree. That's
> why we have a treecleaners project.

The treecleaners project is tasked with keeping these packages working, and
removing them only if there is no other alternative.


--
fonts, by design, by neglect
gcc-porting, for a fact or just for effect
wxwidgets @ gentoo EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 10:39 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org