El sáb, 16-06-2012 a las 22:10 +0200, Peter Stuge escribió:
> Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > > I guess the point is that it is not really a dependency.
> > No, it's a dependency only when you want ppp support working,
> Logically, but not technically.
> I like this separation; the package manager takes care of technical
> requirements, and I get to take care of the logical requirements.
> > > I dunno if a USE flag is much better? Both require the user to inform
> > > herself in the same way ("when do I need USE=ppp for bluez" vs. "when
> > > do I need to emerge ppp")
> > It's much easier to widely set "ppp" USE in make.conf to be sure ppp
> > support works for all things in my system that needing to rebuild
> > affected package to see elog message telling me that I need to manually
> > emerge some other package
> My point is that when you know that you need ppp (and how could you
> set USE=ppp otherwise) then it is about equally easy to emerge ppp
> as it is to set USE=ppp.
But that point is valid with this exact example because, in this case,
it's really intuitive to do so, but in other cases in the tree, there is
not such good liaison between USE flag name and needed package
> > > > people end up with a lot of packages they needed to manually
> > > > emerge some year but that they problem no longer need at all.
> > >
> > > Disk is pretty cheap. If the package is never being used and the user
> > > doesn't care to remove it then the package doesn't do any harm IMO,
> > > and as mentioned I think it's difficult for the package manager to
> > > know what the user has installed on the system but no longer needs..
> > What kind of argument is "disk is pretty cheap".
> Please read the rest of what I wrote too.
> > I still administrate a laptop with a 250GB of disk space, and that
> > space cannot be as large if you have a lot of files at home.
> My primary system had 8GB storage until a few years ago when flash
> prices went down. I was motivated to keep my system clean. If one is
> space constrained then I think one naturally pays more attention to
> keeping world small. Disk is still cheap. If it is a problem for me
> that I have unneeded packages installed, *then* I will start looking
> at cleaning up. Until then, there's no problem.
> > Also, you are missing that having unneeded packages in world file
> > will also cause them to be updated on every system updated, with
> > the time it takes for compile.
> I'm not missing, but I'm saying that it is merely the effect of not
> managing world very actively.
> I think it's difficult to impossible for a package manager to
> reliably determine logical requirements from what is a model
> (USE flags) of technical requirements (link-time dependencies).
Well, looks like a solution for this is already implemented in exherbo
and there were also similar solutions proposed in the past, lets see if
we can agree on witch one would be better for us