Re: [gentoo-dev] sys-apps/texinfo vs @system
On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > people seem happy with this, so i'll have the release team do a test build and > see how it goes. ++ If any of the system packages are going to pull in texinfo then it really should have a use flag for the perl-requiring parts. Otherwise we're not accomplishing much. As already suggested all packages should still install info files, and those who greatly care can install mask them. If while they're at it they can have the latest i686 and amd64 builds not be hardened or nomultilib builds that would also be wonderful (this issue has been coming up here and there for a few months now and drives my automated scripts nuts). :) http://mirror.mcs.anl.gov/pub/gentoo/releases/amd64/autobuilds/latest-stage3-amd64.txt http://mirror.mcs.anl.gov/pub/gentoo/releases/x86/autobuilds/latest-stage3-i686.txt https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=443472 https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=463644 Rich
Re: [gentoo-dev] sys-apps/texinfo vs @system
On Sunday 31 March 2013 01:59:52 Mike Frysinger wrote: > it'd be simpler if we just dropped it altogether from @system. if people > want `info`, they can `emerge` it themselves. if packages want > `makeinfo`, they can DEPEND on it -- few fall into this category (<100 by > a rough survey of random Gentoo installs). people seem happy with this, so i'll have the release team do a test build and see how it goes. there might be growing pains w/packages that lack a texinfo dep (or is accidental), but i don't expect this to impact too many packages (since the # generating info pages is small). and to clarify, the status of the actual info pages being installed into /usr/share/info/ will be unchanged. if you don't like those, you can always FEATURES=noinfo. -mike signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] sys-apps/texinfo vs @system
On 31/03/2013 07:59, Mike Frysinger wrote: > it'd be simpler if we just dropped it altogether from @system. if people > want > `info`, they can `emerge` it themselves. if packages want `makeinfo`, they > can DEPEND on it -- few fall into this category (<100 by a rough survey of > random Gentoo installs). As long as we keep installing info pages by default (and poke upstream with a clue-by-four if they do not distribute them in the first place), I'm happy to have it nuked from @system. -- Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes flamee...@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] sys-apps/texinfo vs @system
On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 12:59 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > the new texinfo-5.x series has rewritten makeinfo in perl. the main `info` > program is still in pure C. > > when it comes to packages installing .info pages, it's largely limited to the > GNU projects as the format has never really caught on. many of those projects > also install man pages. > > personally, i've never found info pages usable. for most utils, the man pages > or the --help output is sufficient, and for people doing heavy development, > the > online html manuals are significantly more useful. agreed. > > when it was pure C, i could live with it as it's only <1MiB and no real deps > to speak of. now it's more like 3MiB, and pulls in 3 semi-uncommon additional > perl packages (not to mention perl itself). > > it's in @system for two reasons: it provides `info` and `makeinfo`. the > former is for reading info pages (i.e. RDEPEND) while the latter is used for > generating info pages (i.e. DEPEND) when the tarball didn't ship with them > pregenerated (they usually do). > > one option would be to make the makeinfo stuff into a USE flag so all the perl > junk isn't pulled in by default. only the packages that actually generate > info pages can DEPEND on that. > > it'd be simpler if we just dropped it altogether from @system. if people want > `info`, they can `emerge` it themselves. if packages want `makeinfo`, they > can DEPEND on it -- few fall into this category (<100 by a rough survey of > random Gentoo installs). > > obviously my preference is for the latter. > -mike I agree with the later as well. -- Doug Goldstein
Re: [gentoo-dev] sys-apps/texinfo vs @system
On 03/31/2013 01:59 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote: personally, i've never found info pages usable. ditto. it'd be simpler if we just dropped it altogether from @system. if people want `info`, they can `emerge` it themselves. if packages want `makeinfo`, they can DEPEND on it -- few fall into this category (<100 by a rough survey of random Gentoo installs). obviously my preference is for the latter. -mike i also prefer just dropping it altogether. same reasons. i suspect it can also be removed from catalyst stage 2 which would clean up those runs. -- Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D. Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened] E-Mail: bluen...@gentoo.org GnuPG FP : 1FED FAD9 D82C 52A5 3BAB DC79 9384 FA6E F52D 4BBA GnuPG ID : F52D4BBA
[gentoo-dev] sys-apps/texinfo vs @system
the new texinfo-5.x series has rewritten makeinfo in perl. the main `info` program is still in pure C. when it comes to packages installing .info pages, it's largely limited to the GNU projects as the format has never really caught on. many of those projects also install man pages. personally, i've never found info pages usable. for most utils, the man pages or the --help output is sufficient, and for people doing heavy development, the online html manuals are significantly more useful. when it was pure C, i could live with it as it's only <1MiB and no real deps to speak of. now it's more like 3MiB, and pulls in 3 semi-uncommon additional perl packages (not to mention perl itself). it's in @system for two reasons: it provides `info` and `makeinfo`. the former is for reading info pages (i.e. RDEPEND) while the latter is used for generating info pages (i.e. DEPEND) when the tarball didn't ship with them pregenerated (they usually do). one option would be to make the makeinfo stuff into a USE flag so all the perl junk isn't pulled in by default. only the packages that actually generate info pages can DEPEND on that. it'd be simpler if we just dropped it altogether from @system. if people want `info`, they can `emerge` it themselves. if packages want `makeinfo`, they can DEPEND on it -- few fall into this category (<100 by a rough survey of random Gentoo installs). obviously my preference is for the latter. -mike signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
