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 11-22-2010, 12:27 AM
Delian Xu
 
Default Can't the Portage be an efficient guy?

Hi there,
*Almost every time when I try to update packages to the latest snapshot, it would failed by these errors or those errors,
I have to say that's really too too bad. Isn't this a big problem of the Portage that users have to hack it every time?


*Gentoo is a system with great freedom, but that doesn't mean to be bad user experience.
*So I'd like to suggest Gentoo-developers devote minds and move on to develop the Portage, that should do more things and


fix issues much more smartly and friendly. I think most Gentoo-users would hope it to be self-moving further.

For example,
*Sometime when you install or update a package, it would failed by 'masked' reasons and you have to deal with the failure


(Though you can use a auto-unmask tool here). * However, users would hope the Portage / emerge system give an option
to chose Y or N like this:
** xxx lines of information and warnings about masked package,

** Would you like to unmask the package and continue the installation? [Y/N]:
*
*This would be much better for all users.* (It is just an example.)


*I think A freedom OS with good user experience would help users get to know things and make the choice easily


and quickly, without dozens of errors/problems every time.
*If the Portage can work as well as APT on Debian, then Gentoo can be a good choice for lots of Linux-Users, but
not only Gentoo-developers or a spot of users that like to hack the OS every day.




As a developer on Linux, I'd like to vote for Gentoo, that is vivid and compendious. But
As a Gentoo user, I would say it gets a bad user experience, the most problems is not the UI, but the Portage is still


too weak and feebleness.

Thanks,
Delian
 
Old 11-22-2010, 12:59 AM
Zac Medico
 
Default Can't the Portage be an efficient guy?

On 11/21/2010 05:27 PM, Delian Xu wrote:
> For example,
> Sometime when you install or update a package, it would failed by 'masked'
> reasons and you have to deal with the failure
> (Though you can use a auto-unmask tool here). However, users would hope
> the Portage / emerge system give an option
> to chose Y or N like this:
> xxx lines of information and warnings about masked package,
> Would you like to unmask the package and continue the installation?
> [Y/N]:
>
> This would be much better for all users. (It is just an example.)

In portage-2.1.9 there's a new --autounmask option. If you like it you
can use EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS to enable it by default in make.conf.

There are a couple of related feature requests that I should also
mention. Bug #258371 [1] requests the ability to automatically satisfy
USE dependencies. This would be similar to having --autounmask enabled
by default, but without requiring you to edit your config files. Bug
#345775 [2] requests an option for --autounmask to automatically edit
config files.

Difficulty in resolving USE dependencies is a very common complaint. For
example, I recently dealt with a user venting similar frustration to
yours on bug #345175 [3].

It's worth mentioning that that there may be a lot of cases in which we
can use IUSE defaults to satisfy reverse USE dependencies, without add
adding any bloat. I would encourage ebuild developers to look for
opportunities like this whenever adding USE dependencies.

[1] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=258371
[2] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=345775
[3] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=345175
--
Thanks,
Zac
 
Old 11-25-2010, 09:40 PM
Sebastian Pipping
 
Default Can't the Portage be an efficient guy?

On 11/22/10 02:59, Zac Medico wrote:
> In portage-2.1.9 there's a new --autounmask option. If you like it you
> can use EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS to enable it by default in make.conf.

Nice. in case I'm not the only one hearing of the --autounmask
parameter the first time, that may indicate it could use more publicity.

Can I get you to blog about it (with an example) on Planet Gentoo?
Anyone else volunteering?

Best,



Sebastian
 
Old 11-25-2010, 10:17 PM
Nirbheek Chauhan
 
Default Can't the Portage be an efficient guy?

On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 4:10 AM, Sebastian Pipping <sping@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 11/22/10 02:59, Zac Medico wrote:
>> In portage-2.1.9 there's a new --autounmask option. If you like it you
>> can use EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS to enable it by default in make.conf.
>
> Nice. *in case I'm not the only one hearing of the --autounmask
> parameter the first time, that may indicate it could use more publicity.
>
> Can I get you to blog about it (with an example) on Planet Gentoo?
> Anyone else volunteering?
>

Zac already blogged about it almost two months ago --
http://blogs.gentoo.org/zmedico/2010/09/07/portage_2-1-9_release/


--
~Nirbheek Chauhan

Gentoo GNOME+Mozilla Team
 
Old 12-06-2010, 08:57 AM
Sebastian Pipping
 
Default Can't the Portage be an efficient guy?

On 11/26/10 00:17, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> Zac already blogged about it almost two months ago --
> http://blogs.gentoo.org/zmedico/2010/09/07/portage_2-1-9_release/

Awesome. Seems like i missed it.



Sebastian
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 04:31 PM.

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