Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] RepoConfigLoader: allow subsitution of variables like ROOT in repos.conf

2015-10-28 Thread Brian Dolbec
On Thu, 22 Oct 2015 18:36:03 -0700 Zac Medico wrote: > This makes it possible to sync repositories inside $ROOT. > > X-Gentoo-Bug: 563836 > X-Gentoo-Bug-URL: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=563836 > --- > pym/portage/repository/config.py | 7 ++- > 1 file

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: ssl vs openssl vs libressl vs gnutls USE flag foo

2015-10-28 Thread Anthony G. Basile
On 10/28/15 7:16 AM, hasufell wrote: On 10/28/2015 07:23 AM, Ryan Hill wrote: Agreed. If there's one choice then "ssl" should be used. openssl/libressl/etc should really be considered sub-flags of ssl. This is what I did with curl. USE=ssl means one and exactly one ssl provider must be

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: ssl vs openssl vs libressl vs gnutls USE flag foo

2015-10-28 Thread hasufell
On 10/28/2015 12:23 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote: > > A properly designed sub-USE flag would be useful here and clearly better > than our REQUIRED_USE. I think REQUIRED_USE is fine for heterogeneous > cases, but not when you have something like curl where you can either > turn ssl on or off. If

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: ssl vs openssl vs libressl vs gnutls USE flag foo

2015-10-28 Thread Kristian Fiskerstrand
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 10/28/2015 12:23 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote: > On 10/28/15 7:16 AM, hasufell wrote: >> On 10/28/2015 07:23 AM, Ryan Hill wrote: >>> Agreed. If there's one choice then "ssl" should be used. >>> openssl/libressl/etc should really be considered

Re: [gentoo-dev] ssl vs openssl vs libressl vs gnutls USE flag foo

2015-10-28 Thread hasufell
On 10/28/2015 09:36 AM, Alexis Ballier wrote: > On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 03:06:59 +0100 > hasufell wrote: >> A is not that difficult. Most uses of 'openssl' can just be replaced >> with 'ssl', others probably with '!gnutls?' even. A few exotic ones >> might stay and we will have

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: ssl vs openssl vs libressl vs gnutls USE flag foo

2015-10-28 Thread Kristian Fiskerstrand
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 10/28/2015 07:23 AM, Ryan Hill wrote: > > Agreed. If there's one choice then "ssl" should be used. > openssl/libressl/etc should really be considered sub-flags of ssl. > If we are introducing a new and proper way to define this it might make

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: ssl vs openssl vs libressl vs gnutls USE flag foo

2015-10-28 Thread Rich Freeman
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 7:16 AM, hasufell wrote: > > This is outside of the scope of this thread, but there are already > distros that have fixed this: > 1. NixOS [0] with truly declarative configuration format, e.g. something > like: > packages.ssl.provider = openssl; Well,

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: ssl vs openssl vs libressl vs gnutls USE flag foo

2015-10-28 Thread hasufell
On 10/28/2015 07:23 AM, Ryan Hill wrote: > > Agreed. If there's one choice then "ssl" should be used. > openssl/libressl/etc > should really be considered sub-flags of ssl. > > I really wish we had some way of specifying this to make things clearer to the > user, so they could see exactly how

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: ssl vs openssl vs libressl vs gnutls USE flag foo

2015-10-28 Thread hasufell
On 10/28/2015 12:20 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > On 10/28/2015 07:23 AM, Ryan Hill wrote: > > >> Agreed. If there's one choice then "ssl" should be used. >> openssl/libressl/etc should really be considered sub-flags of ssl. > > > If we are introducing a new and proper way to define this

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] vardbapi.aux_get: treat cache as valid if mtime is truncated (bug 564222)

2015-10-28 Thread Alexander Berntsen
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Sheesh. That expression barely fits in a tweet. ;) Please just use intermediate statements or an if or something. Otherwise LGTM. - -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: ssl vs openssl vs libressl vs gnutls USE flag foo

2015-10-28 Thread Anthony G. Basile
On 10/28/15 7:30 AM, hasufell wrote: On 10/28/2015 12:23 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote: A properly designed sub-USE flag would be useful here and clearly better than our REQUIRED_USE. I think REQUIRED_USE is fine for heterogeneous cases, but not when you have something like curl where you can

[gentoo-dev] Re: ssl vs openssl vs libressl vs gnutls USE flag foo

2015-10-28 Thread Ryan Hill
On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 22:46:35 -0400 Rich Freeman wrote: > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 10:06 PM, hasufell wrote: > > > > B) 1 feature flag, 3 strict provider flags > > * ssl: enable any sort of SSL/TLS support > > * gnutls: only to enable gnutls provided ssl

Re: [gentoo-dev] ssl vs openssl vs libressl vs gnutls USE flag foo

2015-10-28 Thread Alexis Ballier
On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 03:06:59 +0100 hasufell wrote: > A is not that difficult. Most uses of 'openssl' can just be replaced > with 'ssl', others probably with '!gnutls?' even. A few exotic ones > might stay and we will have to advice users to set USE="openssl > libressl"

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] vardbapi.aux_get: treat cache as valid if mtime is truncated (bug 564222)

2015-10-28 Thread Zac Medico
On 10/28/2015 04:44 AM, Alexander Berntsen wrote: > Sheesh. That expression barely fits in a tweet. ;) Please just use > intermediate statements or an if or something. Otherwise LGTM. I've split it with an if, and also eliminated a redundant comparison since long(cache_mtime) ==