Re: [gentoo-user] gupnp enforces connman || networkmanager
On Monday 16 Jun 2014 00:23:15 Neil Bothwick wrote: On Sun, 15 Jun 2014 22:55:09 +0100, Mick wrote: I'm pretty sure this was a simple developer error. REQUIRED_USE=^^ ( connman networkmanager ) should have been REQUIRED_USE=?? ( connman networkmanager ). The former requires that exactly one flag be enabled. The latter requires that at most one flag may be enabled. Why at most one flag may be enabled? What if *both* connman and networkmanager are installed in a system? Will emerge error out? It's not saying you can't have both installed, only that you cannot have both USE flags in force for that particular package. I got it now. Thanks! -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] gupnp enforces connman || networkmanager
On Sunday 15 Jun 2014 00:31:25 Alan McKinnon wrote: I'm at a loss to explain why this is a good idea or desirable: !!! The ebuild selected to satisfy =net-libs/gupnp-0.18[abi_x86_32(-)?,abi_x86_64(-)?,abi_x86_x32(-)?,abi_mi ps_n32(-)?,abi_mips_n64(-)?,abi_mips_o32(-)?] has unmet requirements. - net-libs/gupnp-0.20.12-r1::gentoo USE=introspection -connman -networkmanager ABI_X86=64 -32 -x32 PYTHON_TARGETS=python2_7 -python2_6 The following REQUIRED_USE flag constraints are unsatisfied: exactly-one-of ( connman networkmanager ) USE=upnp is pulling this in, the major user of that flag here is farstream. Maybe I want farstream. Maybe I want upnp for it. Maybe I don't care for connman or networkmanager (I use wicd, some users want no nw manager at all) So, what is the sense behind a feature of an instant messenger framework causing me to decide between two undesirable connection managers? Anyone see some valid logic that I miss? I think (didn't look into it at any depth) that pidgin draws in net- libs/libnice (because of XMPP?) and libnice has the upnp flag which draws in net-libs/gupnp-igd. I unmerged gupnp and this is what I get: # emerge -uaDtv world These are the packages that would be merged, in reverse order: Calculating dependencies... done! [nomerge ] net-im/pidgin-2.10.9-r1 USE=dbus gstreamer gtk ncurses nls spell xscreensaver (-aqua) -debug -doc -eds -gadu -gnutls -groupwise -idn - meanwhile -mxit -networkmanager -perl -prediction -python -sasl -silc -tcl -tk -zephyr -zeroconf PYTHON_SINGLE_TARGET=python2_7 -python3_2 -python3_3 PYTHON_TARGETS=python2_7 python3_3 -python3_2 [nomerge ] net-libs/farsight2-0.0.31 USE=-msn -python -upnp [nomerge ] net-libs/libnice-0.1.4 USE=upnp [nomerge ]net-libs/gupnp-igd-0.2.2-r1 USE=introspection -python PYTHON_TARGETS=python2_7 [ebuild N ] net-libs/gupnp-0.20.10:0/4 USE=connman introspection - networkmanager PYTHON_TARGETS=python2_7 (-python2_6) 0 kB Interestingly, I do *not* have farsight installed, but I had installed connman to try it with enlightenment (econnman). [I] net-misc/connman Installed versions: 1.21(13:45:57 03/08/14)(bluetooth ethernet policykit wifi -debug -doc -examples -ofono -openconnect -openvpn -tools -vpnc) -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] gupnp enforces connman || networkmanager
On Sun, 15 Jun 2014 01:31:25 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: Maybe I want farstream. Maybe I want upnp for it. Maybe I don't care for connman or networkmanager (I use wicd, some users want no nw manager at all) So, what is the sense behind a feature of an instant messenger framework causing me to decide between two undesirable connection managers? Anyone see some valid logic that I miss? I see two separate issues here. If you re going to depend on a network manager, there should be a virtual - networkmanager, connman, wicd, openrc and systemd all have that capability. Secondly, I agree with you that there seems no need to require a network manager just to use a networked service. After all, people use IM on desktop computers with wired connections. What matters is that you have a network connection, not the mechanics used to set it up. -- Neil Bothwick If at first you don't succeed, give up. No use being a damn fool. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] gupnp enforces connman || networkmanager
On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 7:31 PM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: I'm at a loss to explain why this is a good idea or desirable: !!! The ebuild selected to satisfy =net-libs/gupnp-0.18[abi_x86_32(-)?,abi_x86_64(-)?,abi_x86_x32(-)?,abi_mips_n32(-)?,abi_mips_n64(-)?,abi_mips_o32(-)?] has unmet requirements. - net-libs/gupnp-0.20.12-r1::gentoo USE=introspection -connman -networkmanager ABI_X86=64 -32 -x32 PYTHON_TARGETS=python2_7 -python2_6 The following REQUIRED_USE flag constraints are unsatisfied: exactly-one-of ( connman networkmanager ) USE=upnp is pulling this in, the major user of that flag here is farstream. Maybe I want farstream. Maybe I want upnp for it. Maybe I don't care for connman or networkmanager (I use wicd, some users want no nw manager at all) So, what is the sense behind a feature of an instant messenger framework causing me to decide between two undesirable connection managers? Anyone see some valid logic that I miss? I'm pretty sure this was a simple developer error. REQUIRED_USE=^^ ( connman networkmanager ) should have been REQUIRED_USE=?? ( connman networkmanager ). The former requires that exactly one flag be enabled. The latter requires that at most one flag may be enabled.
Re: [gentoo-user] gupnp enforces connman || networkmanager
On 15/06/2014 20:27, Mike Gilbert wrote: On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 7:31 PM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: I'm at a loss to explain why this is a good idea or desirable: !!! The ebuild selected to satisfy =net-libs/gupnp-0.18[abi_x86_32(-)?,abi_x86_64(-)?,abi_x86_x32(-)?,abi_mips_n32(-)?,abi_mips_n64(-)?,abi_mips_o32(-)?] has unmet requirements. - net-libs/gupnp-0.20.12-r1::gentoo USE=introspection -connman -networkmanager ABI_X86=64 -32 -x32 PYTHON_TARGETS=python2_7 -python2_6 The following REQUIRED_USE flag constraints are unsatisfied: exactly-one-of ( connman networkmanager ) USE=upnp is pulling this in, the major user of that flag here is farstream. Maybe I want farstream. Maybe I want upnp for it. Maybe I don't care for connman or networkmanager (I use wicd, some users want no nw manager at all) So, what is the sense behind a feature of an instant messenger framework causing me to decide between two undesirable connection managers? Anyone see some valid logic that I miss? I'm pretty sure this was a simple developer error. REQUIRED_USE=^^ ( connman networkmanager ) should have been REQUIRED_USE=?? ( connman networkmanager ). The former requires that exactly one flag be enabled. The latter requires that at most one flag may be enabled. You are probably correct, I filed a bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=513310 -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] gupnp enforces connman || networkmanager
On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 2:42 PM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: You are probably correct, I filed a bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=513310 Yes, and I responded to and fixed it earlier in the day. I was just updating the list for those who care. ^_^
Re: [gentoo-user] gupnp enforces connman || networkmanager
On Sunday 15 Jun 2014 19:27:18 Mike Gilbert wrote: On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 7:31 PM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: I'm at a loss to explain why this is a good idea or desirable: !!! The ebuild selected to satisfy =net-libs/gupnp-0.18[abi_x86_32(-)?,abi_x86_64(-)?,abi_x86_x32(-)?,abi_ mips_n32(-)?,abi_mips_n64(-)?,abi_mips_o32(-)?] has unmet requirements. - net-libs/gupnp-0.20.12-r1::gentoo USE=introspection -connman -networkmanager ABI_X86=64 -32 -x32 PYTHON_TARGETS=python2_7 -python2_6 The following REQUIRED_USE flag constraints are unsatisfied: exactly-one-of ( connman networkmanager ) USE=upnp is pulling this in, the major user of that flag here is farstream. Maybe I want farstream. Maybe I want upnp for it. Maybe I don't care for connman or networkmanager (I use wicd, some users want no nw manager at all) So, what is the sense behind a feature of an instant messenger framework causing me to decide between two undesirable connection managers? Anyone see some valid logic that I miss? I'm pretty sure this was a simple developer error. REQUIRED_USE=^^ ( connman networkmanager ) should have been REQUIRED_USE=?? ( connman networkmanager ). The former requires that exactly one flag be enabled. The latter requires that at most one flag may be enabled. Why at most one flag may be enabled? What if *both* connman and networkmanager are installed in a system? Will emerge error out? -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] gupnp enforces connman || networkmanager
On Sun, 15 Jun 2014 22:55:09 +0100, Mick wrote: I'm pretty sure this was a simple developer error. REQUIRED_USE=^^ ( connman networkmanager ) should have been REQUIRED_USE=?? ( connman networkmanager ). The former requires that exactly one flag be enabled. The latter requires that at most one flag may be enabled. Why at most one flag may be enabled? What if *both* connman and networkmanager are installed in a system? Will emerge error out? It's not saying you can't have both installed, only that you cannot have both USE flags in force for that particular package. -- Neil Bothwick Famed tautologist dies of suicide in distressing tragedy signature.asc Description: PGP signature
