On Monday 21 September 2009 18:16:32 Paige Thompson wrote: > I hope nobody finds this offensive, I'm not a great writer but I gotta get > this out there. > > Goal: to resolve quality issues with packages and the behavior of portage > > Problem 1: > > This is a really simple thing, first of all it would help a lot if packages > will not try to build with specified cxxflags if the maintainer hasn't > tested the build and enabled them for that package. > > case and point: > I have -fstack-protector-all in my cxxflags because I'm a paranoid idiot > and I'm overly confident that it could never be wrong to have that. emacs, > fails to build because of it but it's not obvious. I file a really > pedantic bug report, and later through trial and error and after having > gotten over my confidence in -fstack-protector-all realized that without > it the package *does* build. If the ebuild had a feature where it's > metadata did not indicate that it could build with that cxxflag, then > portage could stop and just tell me that up front *OR* prompt me and ask > me what do next. I understand that this would require package maintainers > to actually *test* their packages which is no trivial issue, and who > wouldn't agree that if they're not willing to then somebody else should? > Not only that but it gives you the ability to score maintainers based on > the accuracy of the results. I'm not even suggesting that this feature > should be mandatory it could be something that I could turn on or off-- I > just want it so that I know what's going on and I don't end up wasting > people's time filing bug reports and making them mad at me for being a > noob. > > Problem 2: > I know this is might be kind of nitpicky to you, and it's more or less the > same as problem 1 but I think if I specify -O0 in my cxxflags, that a > package that needs -O2 should not build and tell me that it needs it rather > than just building with -O2 anyway!! I mean seriously, why even give me the > option to specify the optimization level in the cxxflags. It's deceptive, I > don't like that I find it very difficult to take it seriously because of > that.
This is the wrong forum for that. You need to take it up with the devs, IIRC they are at gentoo-dev. Few of them read this list. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
