headers
Henrik Brix Andersen | 1 Feb 2006 01:02
Picon
Favicon

Re: Default Ebuild behaviour

On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 11:17:49PM +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Feb 2006 00:03:46 +0100 Henrik Brix Andersen
> <brix <at> gentoo.org> wrote:
> | On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 10:53:28PM +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> | > I'd prefer "either /etc or /etc and /usr/share/doc" personally. But
> | > yeah, that's a nice solution.
> | 
> | You mean either "/usr/share/doc" or "/etc/ and /usr/share/doc"?
> 
> Uh, yeah.

Good idea.

./Brix
--

-- 
Henrik Brix Andersen <brix <at> gentoo.org>
Gentoo Metadistribution | Mobile computing herd
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Jason Stubbs | 1 Feb 2006 01:50
Picon
Favicon

Re: Re: Unmasking modular X

On Wednesday 01 February 2006 02:28, Mark Loeser wrote:
> Jason Stubbs <jstubbs <at> gentoo.org> said:
> > Is there any need for the packages to go into stable without the X deps being 
> > fixed? Why not just open a bug for the package maintainer and mark it against 
> > whatever bug is requesting stabling of that package? Moving something to 
> > stable that you know is going to be broken within a relatively short 
> > timeframe seems like a very bad idea...
> 
> We are talking about completely unrelated versions, not what we are touching.
> For example, old imagemagick ebuilds sitting around, where the newer ebuilds
> are fixed, but old ones are not.  We have a security bug open about this
> package right now, and having an error about deps in some old version doesn't
> really help arch teams at all.

Security bugs are about the only time I can see any urgency. That's not
a good reason to completely degrade the error though. A switch similar
to --ignore-other-archs that skips certain checks for urgent fixes seems
reasonable though.

--
Jason Stubbs
--

-- 
gentoo-dev <at> gentoo.org mailing list
Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Jason Stubbs | 1 Feb 2006 01:55
Picon
Favicon

Re: IUSE and LINGUAS?

On Tuesday 31 January 2006 22:39, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Tuesday 31 January 2006 06:31, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> > On Monday 30 January 2006 20:54, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > 1. Because for things like LINGUAS, there are arbitrarily many legal
> > > values, and documenting them all and keeping the list up to date would
> > > be extremely difficult.
> >
> > "More precisely, how should they be documented if not via use.desc?"
> 
> considering there's a ton more LINGUAS values than we have USE flags (just run 
> `wc` on use.desc and lang.desc), bloating use.desc with LINGUAS settings 
> benefits *noone*
> 
> we have lang.desc, it is quite populated, what's wrong with having portage 
> read that

Absolutely nothing. I am in no way suggesting that use.desc is the possible
fix. I wasn't even suggesting that each individual flag need be documented.
However, if lang.desc already exists (and it does) and can be renamed to
linguas.desc, it is probably a better way to manage it than use.desc. Is
having INPUT_DEVICES and the like following the same scheme
(ie, input_devices.desc) acceptable?

--
Jason Stubbs
--

-- 
gentoo-dev <at> gentoo.org mailing list
Permalink | Reply | 11 comments |
headers
Donnie Berkholz | 1 Feb 2006 02:08
Picon
Favicon

Re: IUSE and LINGUAS?

Jason Stubbs wrote:
> Is
> having INPUT_DEVICES and the like following the same scheme
> (ie, input_devices.desc) acceptable?

As long as I can still get the pretty output with -vp. =)

Thanks,
Donnie
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Georgi Georgiev | 1 Feb 2006 02:32
Favicon

Re: Default Ebuild behaviour

maillog: 31/01/2006-12:15:00(-0800): Donnie Berkholz types
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 17:06:35 +0000 "Benjamin Smee (strerror)"
> > <strerror <at> gentoo.org> wrote:
> > | On Tuesday 31 January 2006 15:47, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > | > For packages in the second group, not using a USE flag is silly. 
> > | 
> > | I take it you are agreeing we should have a USE flag for these
> > | ebuilds?
> > 
> > For packages where /etc entries are "wanted by some, not wanted by
> > some", yes.
> 
> I finally came up with an idea for this that satisfies my desire to not
> recompile the package to get e.g. a logrotate file. Have the flag
> control whether it's installed to /etc or to /usr/share/doc.

Install it always in /usr/share/doc and use pkg_config() to copy it over
to /etc? Isn't stuff like that what pkg_config() is supposed to do
anyway?

--

-- 
(*   Georgi Georgiev   (* A little suffering is good for the soul. - (*
*)    chutz <at> gg3.net    *) - Kirk, "The Corbomite Maneuver", stardate *)
(* http://www.gg3.net/ (* 1514.0                                     (*
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Mark Loeser | 1 Feb 2006 08:19
Picon
Favicon

Re: Re: Unmasking modular X

Jason Stubbs <jstubbs <at> gentoo.org> said:
> On Wednesday 01 February 2006 02:28, Mark Loeser wrote:
> > We are talking about completely unrelated versions, not what we are touching.
> > For example, old imagemagick ebuilds sitting around, where the newer ebuilds
> > are fixed, but old ones are not.  We have a security bug open about this
> > package right now, and having an error about deps in some old version doesn't
> > really help arch teams at all.
> 
> Security bugs are about the only time I can see any urgency. That's not
> a good reason to completely degrade the error though. A switch similar
> to --ignore-other-archs that skips certain checks for urgent fixes seems
> reasonable though.

I don't really see why anyone that is marking an ebuild stable needs to have
a fatal error because an older version of that package isn't ported yet.  We
are perfectly capable of mentioning this on the bug so the maintainer can fix
it later :) A flag to ignore it will make me, and probably other archs, happy
though.

Thanks,

--

-- 
Mark Loeser   -   Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting toolchain x86)
email         -   halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
                  mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web           -   http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/
                  http://www.halcy0n.com
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Donnie Berkholz | 1 Feb 2006 09:25
Picon
Favicon

Re: Re: Unmasking modular X

Mark Loeser wrote:
> I don't really see why anyone that is marking an ebuild stable needs to have
> a fatal error because an older version of that package isn't ported yet.  We
> are perfectly capable of mentioning this on the bug so the maintainer can fix
> it later :) A flag to ignore it will make me, and probably other archs, happy
> though.

I see broken dependencies with modular X as much more important than
most things repoman warns about now: trailing whitespace, spaces instead
of tabs, etc. So it merits more than they get. Jason's idea of a flag
makes sense to me, because it should require some effort to avoid
porting; it shouldn't be as easy as just not reading warnings.

Thanks,
Donnie
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Andreas Vinsander | 1 Feb 2006 09:59
Picon

Re: Default Ebuild behaviour

Alin Nastac wrote:
> 
> Well, the only reason squid installs a cron/logrotate file is because of
> the sentence <quote>your package ... is supposed to "just work" for the
> end-user</quote>, which at that moment I understood it as a requirement.
> Without it, a fresh squid install needs to be tweaked by the user
> (unless you don't mind to have an ever increasing /var/log/squid/* log
> files).
> 

Just a comment:
Uhm, I think squid does its own logrotation, if the USE logrotate isn't 
enabled for squid when building it.

/Andreas
--

-- 
gentoo-dev <at> gentoo.org mailing list
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Andreas Vinsander | 1 Feb 2006 10:05
Picon

Re: Default Ebuild behaviour

Andreas Vinsander wrote:
> Alin Nastac wrote:
> 
>>
>> Well, the only reason squid installs a cron/logrotate file is because of
>> the sentence <quote>your package ... is supposed to "just work" for the
>> end-user</quote>, which at that moment I understood it as a requirement.
>> Without it, a fresh squid install needs to be tweaked by the user
>> (unless you don't mind to have an ever increasing /var/log/squid/* log
>> files).
>>
> 
> Just a comment:
> Uhm, I think squid does its own logrotation, if the USE logrotate isn't 
> enabled for squid when building it.

And there I go hide in shame... should have read the other thread about 
logrotate USE flag first...

/Andreas
--

-- 
gentoo-dev <at> gentoo.org mailing list
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Ciaran McCreesh | 1 Feb 2006 11:18
Picon
Favicon

Re: Re: Unmasking modular X

On Wed, 01 Feb 2006 00:25:25 -0800 Donnie Berkholz
<spyderous <at> gentoo.org> wrote:
| Mark Loeser wrote:
| > I don't really see why anyone that is marking an ebuild stable
| > needs to have a fatal error because an older version of that
| > package isn't ported yet.  We are perfectly capable of mentioning
| > this on the bug so the maintainer can fix it later :) A flag to
| > ignore it will make me, and probably other archs, happy though.
| 
| I see broken dependencies with modular X

They're not broken. They're sub-optimal.

--

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (King of all Londinium)
Mail            : ciaranm at gentoo.org
Web             : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane