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 03-31-2011, 07:04 AM
Jess J. Guerrero Botella
 
Default Please enhance your USE descriptions!

2011/3/31 Eray Aslan <eras@gentoo.org>:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 04:41:25PM -0500, Dale wrote:
>> +1 *Some descriptions may as well not have one at all. *May as well
>> Google the flag and the package and see what, if anything, it returns.
>
> I would say working as intended. *If you do not know what a package
> does, chances are you don't need to enable it. *And if you do want
> to tinker, USE flags gives you enough of a hint to start googling.

This has nothing to do with what you want to imply here. It's not
about the tech skill of the user reading the definition. It's about
the definitions being generic and vague enough so they can fit eight
thousand packages that doesn't relate in any way, right?

To say that the kde use flag gives "support for kde" says next to
nothing to me on some packages. When I look into the ebuild and/or
into the sources I can see all it does is to copy a .desktop file
somewhere, or to enable the kde file dialog, or to create a window
deco or a plasma snippet, or a phonon backend, or a color scheme.
That's what I wanted to know and there's no way I can know it by
looking at the USE description.

> Having said that, we should at least have gramatically correct
> English in descriptions. *One might also lean towards more verbosity
> in end-user oriented packages (versus server/backend/toolchain
> packages). *In any case, 10-15 words should be more than enough to
> explain what a USE flag does.

Mostly. But try cleaning the ffmpeg/libav-mplayer mess to decide which
codec to use and you will find that a clear explanation (so you can
decide) can't fit into that space.

I don't have a problem reading ebuilds, though having to dive into the
sources of a big package is another story, but I can understand users
that find this an unpractical "solution". After all, if the USE
descriptions doesn't tell a thing we should just remove them because
they are taking space in our portage tree to provide zero info. So,
"kde" flag purpose is to "enable support for KDE", oh,
really?[/sarcasm]

--
Jess Guerrero Botella
 
Old 03-31-2011, 07:04 AM
Dale
 
Default Please enhance your USE descriptions!

Amadeusz Żołnowski wrote:

Excerpts from Alec Warner's message of Thu Mar 31 08:23:45 +0200 2011:


On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 5:59 AM, Dale<rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:


Eray Aslan wrote:
In all seriousness, this has been discussed before and it doesn't
get any better. I'm not sure how to fix it either. The space for
the description is limited.


What is the limit? Anyway we can change it, cannot we? And you can
always write shortly something better than “Enable support for foo”.





I don't recall the exact amount but it is sort of small. After all, if
there was no limit, some would write a book about the flag. ;-)




On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 5:59 AM, Dale<rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
Read the ebuild?


Read-the-ebuild? And maybe unpack the archive, check configure's help,
read the README, INSTALL and so, and analyze source code to eventually
find out what the flag does? This that what user is supposed to do for
every package?



If I am expected to read every single thing installed on here, I would
never get to use the puter for anything else. I have almost 1,000
packages on here. Most of which I really don't need to know the inner
working of as a user. USE flags could come in handy tho. I always
check them before a upgrade/install.


I was just reading through the USE file, it is a lot better than it used
to be. Someone has been doing some work in there. There are still some
that I am clueless about but a lot of them are better. I like these:


directfb - Adds support for DirectFB layer (library for FB devices)
latex - Adds support for LaTeX (typesetting package)

Those two are pretty good to be so short.

Dale

:-) :-)
 
Old 03-31-2011, 07:23 AM
justin
 
Default Please enhance your USE descriptions!

This is what I mean by good description

+ <flag name="mp3">Enable support for mp3 decoding over
<pkg>media-sound/mpg123</pkg> instead of relying on ffmpeg support.</flag>

instead of the default

mp3 - Add support for reading mp3 files

Everybody understands what mp3 means, but we truely need something else
here.

justin
 
Old 03-31-2011, 07:33 AM
Fabian Groffen
 
Default Please enhance your USE descriptions!

On 31-03-2011 09:23:16 +0200, justin wrote:
> This is what I mean by good description
>
> + <flag name="mp3">Enable support for mp3 decoding over
> <pkg>media-sound/mpg123</pkg> instead of relying on ffmpeg support.</flag>
>
> instead of the default
>
> mp3 - Add support for reading mp3 files
>
> Everybody understands what mp3 means, but we truely need something else
> here.

Are these two descriptions for the same package? Both messages say
something different to me. This is not an improvement perse, but just a
correction, because one of the two is (or both are) clearly wrong.

I find the default clear enough. It seems the mp3 USE-flag is
overloaded with multiple functions, this is likely the cause of the
problem here.



--
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level
 
Old 03-31-2011, 07:41 AM
Tomáš Chvátal
 
Default Please enhance your USE descriptions!

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Dne 31.3.2011 09:33, Fabian Groffen napsal(a):
> On 31-03-2011 09:23:16 +0200, justin wrote:
>> This is what I mean by good description
>>
>> + <flag name="mp3">Enable support for mp3 decoding over
>> <pkg>media-sound/mpg123</pkg> instead of relying on ffmpeg support.</flag>
>>
>> instead of the default
>>
>> mp3 - Add support for reading mp3 files
>>
>> Everybody understands what mp3 means, but we truely need something else
>> here.
>
> Are these two descriptions for the same package? Both messages say
> something different to me. This is not an improvement perse, but just a
> correction, because one of the two is (or both are) clearly wrong.
>
> I find the default clear enough. It seems the mp3 USE-flag is
> overloaded with multiple functions, this is likely the cause of the
> problem here.
>
>
>
The mp3 useflag is correct. It just can use mpg123 which is actualy
better implementation and if you compile mplayer with -mp3 then it looks
to libavcodec for the mp3 support (which is supposed to be worse than
the mpg123).
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk2UMBYACgkQHB6c3gNBRYfsPwCgqAfhVNNfGy vwOfDh1MNqc67Q
TLgAn3xvG3Zi/PbZZRLy/WVpuDZTs+uD
=OeN9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
 
Old 03-31-2011, 07:44 AM
justin
 
Default Please enhance your USE descriptions!

On 31/03/11 09:33, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 31-03-2011 09:23:16 +0200, justin wrote:
>> This is what I mean by good description
>>
>> + <flag name="mp3">Enable support for mp3 decoding over
>> <pkg>media-sound/mpg123</pkg> instead of relying on ffmpeg support.</flag>
>>
>> instead of the default
>>
>> mp3 - Add support for reading mp3 files
>>
>> Everybody understands what mp3 means, but we truely need something else
>> here.
>
> Are these two descriptions for the same package? Both messages say
> something different to me. This is not an improvement perse, but just a
> correction, because one of the two is (or both are) clearly wrong.
>
> I find the default clear enough. It seems the mp3 USE-flag is
> overloaded with multiple functions, this is likely the cause of the
> problem here.
>
>
>

First is a package specific, second is the default.

And no, asuming the USE is introduced correctly here, it makes a
difference, whether we take the global meaning -> reading mp3 files at
all; or changing the way it is done for this package. Because here it
means, you could not disable mp3 support, but rather choose on which way
it should happen.
 
Old 03-31-2011, 07:51 AM
Fabian Groffen
 
Default Please enhance your USE descriptions!

On 31-03-2011 09:41:10 +0200, Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
> Dne 31.3.2011 09:33, Fabian Groffen napsal(a):
> > On 31-03-2011 09:23:16 +0200, justin wrote:
> >> instead of the default
> >>
> >> mp3 - Add support for reading mp3 files
> >
> > I find the default clear enough. It seems the mp3 USE-flag is
> > overloaded with multiple functions, this is likely the cause of the
> > problem here.
> >
> The mp3 useflag is correct. It just can use mpg123 which is actualy
> better implementation and if you compile mplayer with -mp3 then it looks
> to libavcodec for the mp3 support (which is supposed to be worse than
> the mpg123).

use.desc gives the default USE-description, which says it enables
support for reading mp3 files. Hence, (based on what you say) the
useflag is incorrect for mplayer, because it can *always* read
mp3-files.

mplayer should not use mp3 USE-flag, because -mp3 to still have a
mp3-reading capable player feels quite counter-intuitive. It happens to
be that mp3 USE-flag is hooked up to the encode USE-flag -- this is
where it no longer has anything to do with the description from
use.desc.


--
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level
 
Old 03-31-2011, 07:57 AM
Fabian Groffen
 
Default Please enhance your USE descriptions!

On 31-03-2011 09:44:37 +0200, justin wrote:
> First is a package specific, second is the default.
>
> And no, asuming the USE is introduced correctly here, it makes a
> difference, whether we take the global meaning -> reading mp3 files at
> all; or changing the way it is done for this package. Because here it
> means, you could not disable mp3 support, but rather choose on which way
> it should happen.

If a flag is in use.desc (global), then I should be able to put it in my
USE= in my /etc/make.conf. That also means that the flag should only be
used to do exactly as it says in use.desc, and nothing else.

The package in question here should really use a different USE-flag,
because it is overloading the original (intended?) meaning of the mp3
USE-flag, leading to possibly unexpected results for the end-user.

There is nothing unclear on the descriptions here, the same flag is just
used for two different things, which is wrong if the flag is global.


--
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level
 
Old 03-31-2011, 08:03 AM
justin
 
Default Please enhance your USE descriptions!

On 31/03/11 09:57, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 31-03-2011 09:44:37 +0200, justin wrote:
>> First is a package specific, second is the default.
>>
>> And no, asuming the USE is introduced correctly here, it makes a
>> difference, whether we take the global meaning -> reading mp3 files at
>> all; or changing the way it is done for this package. Because here it
>> means, you could not disable mp3 support, but rather choose on which way
>> it should happen.
>
> If a flag is in use.desc (global), then I should be able to put it in my
> USE= in my /etc/make.conf. That also means that the flag should only be
> used to do exactly as it says in use.desc, and nothing else.
>
> The package in question here should really use a different USE-flag,
> because it is overloading the original (intended?) meaning of the mp3
> USE-flag, leading to possibly unexpected results for the end-user.
>
> There is nothing unclear on the descriptions here, the same flag is just
> used for two different things, which is wrong if the flag is global.
>
>

Lets stop this discussion, because this doesn't has to do with the topic.
All I wanted to do, is illustrating the difference between a missleading
or not understandable USE description, to something, where I directly
get a clue, what happens if I set it.
 
Old 03-31-2011, 08:11 AM
Tomáš Chvátal
 
Default Please enhance your USE descriptions!

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Dne 31.3.2011 09:51, Fabian Groffen napsal(a):
> On 31-03-2011 09:41:10 +0200, Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
>> Dne 31.3.2011 09:33, Fabian Groffen napsal(a):
>>> On 31-03-2011 09:23:16 +0200, justin wrote:
>>>> instead of the default
>>>>
>>>> mp3 - Add support for reading mp3 files
>>>
>>> I find the default clear enough. It seems the mp3 USE-flag is
>>> overloaded with multiple functions, this is likely the cause of the
>>> problem here.
>>>
>> The mp3 useflag is correct. It just can use mpg123 which is actualy
>> better implementation and if you compile mplayer with -mp3 then it looks
>> to libavcodec for the mp3 support (which is supposed to be worse than
>> the mpg123).
>
> use.desc gives the default USE-description, which says it enables
> support for reading mp3 files. Hence, (based on what you say) the
> useflag is incorrect for mplayer, because it can *always* read
> mp3-files.
>
> mplayer should not use mp3 USE-flag, because -mp3 to still have a
> mp3-reading capable player feels quite counter-intuitive. It happens to
> be that mp3 USE-flag is hooked up to the encode USE-flag -- this is
> where it no longer has anything to do with the description from
> use.desc.
>
>
Well technically yep, but for lets say the ffmpeg the mp3 useflag means
"Enable mp3 encoding support."

If user sets -mp3 it still can play mp3 tracks but in really worse
quality so it is just nice convinience that ffmpeg always allows playing
those files.

Since i was that kind and disabled internal libmp3 that was first in
order of what would be used simply with -mp3 you will get mplayer
playing mp3 tracks but it is not desirable for you to do so.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk2UNx0ACgkQHB6c3gNBRYeKiQCgyoeAnZiTpv Oz5cCuSQ32jU/W
Cf0AoJdnIgdu9c/99Qy1i3gLkDIv77cB
=99Me
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 03:12 PM.

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