Re: [gentoo-dev] Package up for grabs

[Michał Górny]

On Tue, 31 May 2016 08:43:55 +0800 (HKT)
Brendan Horan  wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I am currently the proxy maintainer for app-arch/snappy.
> I no longer have the time/interest to proxy maintain this.
> I wish to be removed from the metadata.xml.
> 
> It has one open bug :
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=551238
> 
> There are currently no other maintainers.
> This would drop it back to "Maintainer Needed" if no one is interested.

I'll take it, and remove you while at it.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny



pgpHFX8GlzXrN.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

[gentoo-dev] Package up for grabs

[Brendan Horan]

Hi,

I am currently the proxy maintainer for app-arch/snappy.
I no longer have the time/interest to proxy maintain this.
I wish to be removed from the metadata.xml.

It has one open bug :
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=551238

There are currently no other maintainers.
This would drop it back to "Maintainer Needed" if no one is interested.

Thanks

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] gtk/gtk2/gtk3 USE flag situation

[Joakim Tjernlund]

On Fri, 2016-05-27 at 18:21 -0400, NP-Hardass wrote:
> On 05/27/2016 06:05 PM, Daniel Campbell wrote:
> > On 05/27/2016 02:45 PM, NP-Hardass wrote:
> > > Not on hand, but as the MATE maintainer, I can tell you that starting
> > > with MATE-1.14, two packages are gtk3 only, and starting with 1.16, four
> > > more are.
> > > 
> 
> > 
> > Aha, thanks for offering that info. Which ones if you don't mind?
> > 
> in 1.14 x11-misc/mozo and mate-extra/mate-system-monitor.  Don't have
> the 1.16 ones handy as I haven't been able to work on it the last week
> (more hw issues)
> 

NP, there are 2 patches floating on the MATE ml that move the dependency on 
sys-power/upower-pm-utils
consolekit(suspend/resume is handled by consolekit instead). Wold you be 
interested to
add those to gentoo MATE?

  Jocke

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] gtk/gtk2/gtk3 USE flag situation

[Mart Raudsepp]

Ühel kenal päeval, R, 27.05.2016 kell 13:14, kirjutas Anthony G.
Basile:
> On 5/27/16 12:59 PM, rindeal wrote:
> > On 27 May 2016 at 18:54, landis blackwell  > m> wrote:
> > > I stopped reading after you reminded me it was 2016
> > 
> > Good to know, thanks for stopping by.
> > 
> 
> Yeah the "its  year" meme has been making its rounds of the
> internet.
> 
> anyhow, my 2017 question is about avahi.  right now i have USE=gtk
> and
> gtk3, where gtk really means gtk2.  i'm not going to change that
> because
> it fits QA's specs.  but i could remove it altogether and just drop
> gtk2
> support for the next release.  good idea?  bad idea?  i guess i'm
> asking
> whats the status of gtk2 in gentoo seeing as its dead upstream.

Instead you should have 3 packages here.

avahi that ships the non-gtk linking bits.
avahi-gtk2 that ships the gtk2 library.
avahi-gtk3 that ships the gtk3 library.

This wasn't done originally as we lacked the manpower there and hoped
that gtk2 consumers will go away soon anyway. If that isn't the case,
the work should be done long ago. I hear there have been various
dependency issues already anyways due to the splitting not having been
done.

If there are no more avahi-gtk2 consumers, you could drop the gtk2
support altogether and maybe not need the splitting.
Then the question is if you name it USE="gtk" or USE="gtk3" to build
the gtk3 component.
Either way, consumers would USE depend correctly on which they need - I
don't think it's magical, so consumers would always actually link to it
and a clear USE depend can be in place.

So in an ideal world, you wouldn't have any USE=gtk* whatsoever here
anyways.


Mart

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] How to deal with LINGUAS mess?

[Andrew Savchenko]

On Sun, 29 May 2016 14:58:03 +0200 Michał Górny wrote:
> On Sat, 21 May 2016 11:19:07 -0400
> waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 09:41:28AM +0200, Micha?? Górny wrote
> > 
> > > I see the following possibilities:
> > > 
> > > 1. We start explicitly listing linguas_* in all ebuilds, no matter how
> > > tiny they are. Maintainers are required to keep IUSE up-to-date
> > > and users are forced to rebuild a lot. This is also a QA violation
> > > in terms of invalid use of USE flags.
> > > 
> > > 2. We hack-unset LINGUAS in ebuilds. This is a lot of effort, easy to
> > > miss and probably would need to repeated for every single phase anyway
> > > due to how global variables are handled in PMS. Additionally, it may
> > > break at some point since those variables are likely expected to be
> > > read-only anyway.
> > > 
> > > 3. We remove LINGUAS from USE_EXPAND and stop using it. If ebuilds have
> > > a good reason to use flags for localization, we introduce a new,
> > > non-colliding USE_EXPAND for that. We also ask users to replace LINGUAS
> > > with the new flag in their make.conf files. LINGUAS gets the original
> > > upstream behavior back, and we eventually discourage it in favor of new
> > > INSTALL_MASK features (WiP) [2].
> > > 
> > > 4. We fix build systems not to do magic depending on whether LINGUAS
> > > is unset or set-to-empty. Instead, we could some special special value
> > > like '-' to signify not installing localizations at all. But that's
> > > upstream thing to do, and breaks backwards compatibility with existing
> > > systems disabling localizations.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Your thoughts?  
> > 
> > 5. An reversed variant of INSTALL_MASK in make.conf, e.g.
> > LOCALE_ALLOW="foo bar fubar"
> > 
> > which would block installing files in /usr/share/locale/* and
> > /usr/share/man/* EXCEPT for...
> > 
> > /usr/share/locale/foo
> > /usr/share/locale/bar
> > /usr/share/locale/fubar
> > /usr/share/man/foo
> > /usr/share/man/bar
> > /usr/share/man/fubar
> 
> This can be accomplished using inclusion/exclusion logic included in
> the patches I've recently sent for Portage.
> 
>   INSTALL_MASK="/usr/share/locale -/usr/share/locale/foo"
 
A proper way will be to fix ebuilds to respect LINGUAS properly.
l10n.eclass makes this quite easy. Build and install files just to
remove them later before/after merge to a live system is ridiculous,
especially considering that LINGUAS covers not only manuals, but
also html docs and other files.

Why users should care about additional INSTALL_MASK ordeal if they
already set up LINGUAS properly? This is PM and ebuild maintainers
job.

The same states for cron, systemd, logrotate and other potentially
unneeded files. Install mask is dangerous, very dangerous, because
locations may move, mandatory files may have accidentally removed
by an oversight. INSTALL_MASK is indeed useful, essential tool and
it is nice that it is being extended, but it should be a last
resort way to fix stuff, not a recommended technique.

The real problem is that "small files" control creates much burden
for package maintainers. It should be fixed by versatile and easy
to use eclasses, ideally the most popular helpers should go to PMS,
e.g. to default src_install().

Moving all burden of "small files" control and optional cleanup
from developers to users is not nice.

Best regards,
Andrew Savchenko


pgp2r1pGjRyz2.pgp
Description: PGP signature