Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: Dynamic USE dependencies
On Fri, 3 Apr 2015 06:38:48 + (UTC) Duncan 1i5t5.dun...@cox.net wrote: Rich Freeman posted on Thu, 02 Apr 2015 22:26:03 -0400 as excerpted: If you stuck -* in your make.conf then this change would have no affect at all, since you've explicitly set the configuration of every use flag. That (and package.use still sticking) eases my mind considerably. The current configuration forces you to use config files to capture settings you care about, and also ones you don't actually care about, and unless you're careful you'll have trouble telling these settings apart later. It is like sticking every installed package in your world file. That comparison is quite persuasive, indeed. =:^) Thanks! I understand your idea much better, now, and (cautiously) agree. =:^) (Tho FWIW, I guess I'm a careful one. I use -* and put non-global USE flags in make.conf too if possible, and review USE flags for all new packages and changes, so everything there is cared about for one reason or another. Package.use thus contains only individual package exceptions, and I comment those with both a date and why they /are/ exceptions to the otherwise global policy, so if the only justification is because package X requires it, that's in the comment. Make.conf's USE= setting does still accumulate unannotated stale flags over time, but I just went thru and verified all USE flags were still used recently, deleting the ones that equery hasuse didn't raise a hit on, and justifying either by-name or by equery uses every remaining entry, so everything there is verified there for a reason now, too.) This is a reminder to you all... since enalyze is little known to users. enalyze application in gentoolkit I made does installed db analysis. The analyze submodule creates detailed reports about use flags (and other stuff) usage. The rebuild module can create new pkg.* files for you to maintain the installed state. Allowing you to easily make make.conf USE= changes or profile changes and have your pkg.* files fixed to match. Of course detailed comments it does not do ;) plus it saves the new file to your user space, you can do what you like with them from there. Editing your detail commented files to match, etc.. stright swap,... -- Brian Dolbec dolsen
Re: [gentoo-dev] libressl status
On 04/03/2015 01:49 AM, Paul B. Henson wrote: What is the current status/thoughts regarding libressl? Reviewing the bug and some past threads, it sounds like the initial plan was to make openssl a virtual and let either classic openssl or libressl fulfull it? Not anymore. We will go for libressl USE flag for the same reason there is a libav USE flag now (working subslots etc). I'm not sure if things have changed from that viewpoint, but it really doesn't seem they're going to be plug and play compatible 8-/. libressl offers functionality openssl doesn't and vice versa, and playing nicely with each other doesn't seem to be on the agenda of either. It seems it might make more sense to treat them more like openssl and gnutls, where they both provide similar ssl functionality but a given package might use one, the other, or either? Renaming library file names is a no-go, imo. Same story with symlink hacks via eselect. The specific reason for my current inquiry is that the latest openntpd release includes the new support from openbsd for constraints, where basically you can verify ntp time sources by checking their time relative to a trusted TLS server (which provides the time in HTTP headers). This functionality requires libtls, part of libressl. openssl provides no compatible functionality, so this is a case where they're not plug-and-play, openntpd requires libressl specifically. Well, since openntpd is developed by BSD guys, no wonder about that decision... I guess you could still try to provide a compatibility patch for openssl.
[gentoo-portage-dev] Re: Dynamic USE dependencies
Rich Freeman posted on Thu, 02 Apr 2015 22:26:03 -0400 as excerpted: If you stuck -* in your make.conf then this change would have no affect at all, since you've explicitly set the configuration of every use flag. That (and package.use still sticking) eases my mind considerably. The current configuration forces you to use config files to capture settings you care about, and also ones you don't actually care about, and unless you're careful you'll have trouble telling these settings apart later. It is like sticking every installed package in your world file. That comparison is quite persuasive, indeed. =:^) Thanks! I understand your idea much better, now, and (cautiously) agree. =:^) (Tho FWIW, I guess I'm a careful one. I use -* and put non-global USE flags in make.conf too if possible, and review USE flags for all new packages and changes, so everything there is cared about for one reason or another. Package.use thus contains only individual package exceptions, and I comment those with both a date and why they /are/ exceptions to the otherwise global policy, so if the only justification is because package X requires it, that's in the comment. Make.conf's USE= setting does still accumulate unannotated stale flags over time, but I just went thru and verified all USE flags were still used recently, deleting the ones that equery hasuse didn't raise a hit on, and justifying either by-name or by equery uses every remaining entry, so everything there is verified there for a reason now, too.) -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master. Richard Stallman
Re: [gentoo-dev] libressl status
On 04/03/2015 01:49 AM, Paul B. Henson wrote: The specific reason for my current inquiry is that the latest openntpd release includes the new support from openbsd for constraints, where basically you can verify ntp time sources by checking their time relative to a trusted TLS server (which provides the time in HTTP headers). This functionality requires libtls, part of libressl. openssl provides no compatible functionality, so this is a case where they're not plug-and-play, openntpd requires libressl specifically. Also, feel free to provide a pull request for the current openssl-incompatible openntpd at https://github.com/gentoo/libressl
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: Dynamic USE dependencies
On Fri, 3 Apr 2015 11:52:39 + (UTC) Duncan 1i5t5.dun...@cox.net wrote: Brian Dolbec posted on Thu, 02 Apr 2015 23:59:06 -0700 as excerpted: This is a reminder to you all... since enalyze is little known to users. Thanks for the hint. I'd never heard of enalyze before but it sounds useful. I'll investigate. =:^) Please consider writing up a tips-n-tricks section feature for enalyze in an upcoming gentoo news, too. That should bring it rather more exposure among the power users at least, who will propagate the knowledge thru the lists and forums, etc. I know that's the way I've come across several tools I now keep in my virtual toolbox, over the years. =:^) Been there, done that... ;) https://blogs.gentoo.org/news/2014/03/ And there are several main #gentoo contributors that know about it. I keep coming across people that don't know about it still. -- Brian Dolbec dolsen
