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


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 03-28-2010, 06:27 AM
Brian Harring
 
Default usemove

On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 01:03:43AM -0500, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> I seriously hate changing USE flags for the sake of changing use
> flags. This provides a moderate amount of annoyance for anyone that
> maintains more then one Gentoo box because they need to then tinker
> with their /etc/make.conf and /etc/portage/package.use to get
> everything right again. And oh no what if the one box is on ~arch and
> one isn't and what if one is x86 and one isn't. Its just such a
> configuration nightmare.
>
> So unless there's any real benefit, I'm against this.

I'm not arguing for arbitrary changes, but if the change makes sense
and isn't trivial it should be done.

What is needed is to tweak the tools for such a move- specifically
adding a new command to the update machinery (profiles/updates).
Something roughly like

usemove [atom] original_flag new_flag

If an atom is specified, the move applies only to w/in that pkg; if no
atom, it's a global shift in the configuration (meaning all ebuilds
now use gtk instead of gtk2 for example).

Examples:

usemove gtk gtk2
usemove app-admin/gtkrellm gnutls ssl
usemove dev-cpp/sptk:3 gnutls ssl
usemove >=app-editors/emacs-22.3 gzip-el gzip

Etc.

Per the norm for updates, usual rules apply- since it's a string of
delta commands, once a command is in there it cannot be changed in
purpose (although folk can tweak existing commands to update for a
final target, eg: A -> B, B -> C; changing it to A -> C, B -> C).


> Also two little side points... USE defaults happened in EAPI 1. And
> the method by which you're asking people to select would be nice if we
> had some method for saying USE X and Y are subset of USE A.

USE_EXPAND, roughly- I wouldn't say it's fully there, but it certainly
would be where I'd start for any proposal...

~harring
 
Old 03-28-2010, 11:02 AM
Petteri Räty
 
Default usemove

On 03/28/2010 09:27 AM, Brian Harring wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 01:03:43AM -0500, Doug Goldstein wrote:
>> I seriously hate changing USE flags for the sake of changing use
>> flags. This provides a moderate amount of annoyance for anyone that
>> maintains more then one Gentoo box because they need to then tinker
>> with their /etc/make.conf and /etc/portage/package.use to get
>> everything right again. And oh no what if the one box is on ~arch and
>> one isn't and what if one is x86 and one isn't. Its just such a
>> configuration nightmare.
>>
>> So unless there's any real benefit, I'm against this.
>
> I'm not arguing for arbitrary changes, but if the change makes sense
> and isn't trivial it should be done.
>
> What is needed is to tweak the tools for such a move- specifically
> adding a new command to the update machinery (profiles/updates).
> Something roughly like
>
> usemove [atom] original_flag new_flag
>
> If an atom is specified, the move applies only to w/in that pkg; if no
> atom, it's a global shift in the configuration (meaning all ebuilds
> now use gtk instead of gtk2 for example).
>

Filed Future EAPI request:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=311731

>
> USE_EXPAND, roughly- I wouldn't say it's fully there, but it certainly
> would be where I'd start for any proposal...
>

A good point. So how about renaming gnutls openssl and nss to
ssl_implementation_* to make the usage clear?

Regards,
Petteri
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 09:02 PM.

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