[gentoo-dev] Re: Questions about stabilization requests

2008-09-08 Thread Duncan
Mart Raudsepp [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Mon, 08 Sep 2008 08:32:20 +0300: Setting test USE flag is never appropriate as far as I know. FEATURES=test enables the USE flag on its own, and it should never be enabled or disabled in a users USE settings in

[gentoo-dev] Re: FHS compliant KDE install and multi-version support

2008-09-08 Thread Christian Faulhammer
Hi, Marcus D. Hanwell [EMAIL PROTECTED]: We would have the option of using a kde prefix in order to slot it with KDE 4, other distros have worked hard to actually slot KDE 3 and 4 installed in /usr/ this time around. Ideally we would work with them to achieve a similar outcome. We would

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Ability to pass arguments to src_configure/src_compile

2008-09-08 Thread Vaeth
On Sun, 7 Sep 2008, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: Vaeth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Santiago M. Mola wrote: Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thomas Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: DEFAULT_SRC_CONFIGURE_USE_{WITHS,ENABLES}

Re: [gentoo-dev] FHS compliant KDE install and multi-version support

2008-09-08 Thread Peter Volkov
В Вск, 07/09/2008 в 15:34 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh пишет: On Sun, 07 Sep 2008 17:24:55 +0400 Peter Volkov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In any case as FHS and /usr/kde/version installations should set differently SLOT seems that new portage feature is required... May be portage should allow

[gentoo-dev] Bug wrangling

2008-09-08 Thread Christian Faulhammer
Hi, everyone working on bugs, please add all people from metadata.xml to the assignee or cc field, I regularly have to search for bugs where a team and I maintain a package because only the team has been added. Second, please use full atoms (cat-egory/package) in the Summary field, so searching

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Ability to pass arguments to src_configure/src_compile

2008-09-08 Thread David Leverton
On Monday 08 September 2008 08:48:23 Vaeth wrote: But it doesn't do this well Those of us who have actually been using it say it does.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Ability to pass arguments to src_configure/src_compile

2008-09-08 Thread Vaeth
Yes. And here another point should be brought up. This proposal should be wider and consider similar changes for the most common used operations on all phases. And in fact, the most common used operations on all phases are already covered: Namely, this is the default implementation of the

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Ability to pass arguments to src_configure/src_compile

2008-09-08 Thread Santiago M. Mola
On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 9:48 AM, Vaeth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But it doesn't do this well, because it is incompatible with any other case. Assume, for example, that you have an ebuild in this manner and that for the new release or for a bugfix you need a small non-included thing - then this

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Ability to pass arguments to src_configure/src_compile

2008-09-08 Thread Alec Warner
On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 1:07 AM, Vaeth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes. And here another point should be brought up. This proposal should be wider and consider similar changes for the most common used operations on all phases. And in fact, the most common used operations on all phases are

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Ability to pass arguments to src_configure/src_compile

2008-09-08 Thread Santiago M. Mola
On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 10:44 AM, Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Most obvious failure cases these days have build logs and the build logs will specify what the configure command was, so the only problematic area is looking at the ebuild to determine what will happen during execution.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Ability to pass arguments to src_configure/src_compile

2008-09-08 Thread Mike Auty
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Santiago M. Mola wrote: If you're just dealing with the default phases, it's not too hard to say in advance the exact command that will be executed. If that's the case, why go so far as to define three new variables and potentially put them out in

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Ability to pass arguments to src_configure/src_compile

2008-09-08 Thread Alec Warner
On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 1:58 AM, Santiago M. Mola [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 10:44 AM, Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Most obvious failure cases these days have build logs and the build logs will specify what the configure command was, so the only problematic area is

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Ability to pass arguments to src_configure/src_compile

2008-09-08 Thread Vaeth
Alec Warner wrote: Vaeth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (Moreover, in most cases, this would not even save some characters, because the variable names would have to be much longer...) I don't think the variable names are really in scope (we can chose them arbitrarily). But you cannot choose

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Ability to pass arguments to src_configure/src_compile

2008-09-08 Thread Santiago M. Mola
On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 1:56 PM, Vaeth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Santiago M. Mola wrote: Vaeth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] The suggestion violates in an extreme way the golden design rule that small changes in effect should require small changes in source. [...] Yes, you're right. That

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Ability to pass arguments to src_configure/src_compile

2008-09-08 Thread Vaeth
Santiago M. Mola wrote: Vaeth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] The suggestion violates in an extreme way the golden design rule that small changes in effect should require small changes in source. [...] Yes, you're right. That would be really tedious and stupid... but we're lucky, and

Re: [gentoo-dev] FHS compliant KDE install and multi-version support

2008-09-08 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Mon, 08 Sep 2008 11:48:03 +0400 Peter Volkov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And should you be able to have the same KDE version with both USE=multislot and USE=-multislot installed at the same time? There are different SLOTs for different USE flags combination and package manager should allow

Re: [gentoo-dev] Bug wrangling

2008-09-08 Thread Mark Loeser
Christian Faulhammer [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Hi, everyone working on bugs, please add all people from metadata.xml to the assignee or cc field, I regularly have to search for bugs where a team and I maintain a package because only the team has been added. Second, please use full atoms

Re: [gentoo-dev] FHS compliant KDE install and multi-version support

2008-09-08 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: a) PROPERTIES can't be used to implement any mandatory feature This is true in the absence of an EAPI bump. However, for completeness, I'd like to mention that it is possible to specify that a given PROPERTIES value have

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Questions about stabilization requests

2008-09-08 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Mon, 08 Sep 2008 08:32:20 +0300 Mart Raudsepp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Setting test USE flag is never appropriate as far as I know. FEATURES=test enables the USE flag on its own, and it should never be enabled or disabled in a users USE settings in /etc/make.conf or any other place.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Ability to pass arguments to src_configure/src_compile

2008-09-08 Thread Luca Barbato
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Sun, 07 Sep 2008 12:46:45 -0400 Marcus D. Hanwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The proposal is not designed to replace all cases. It's designed to replace the common 50%. I personally agree with several others who have replied to this thread. The reduction in lines of

Re: [gentoo-dev] Bug wrangling

2008-09-08 Thread Joe Peterson
Christian Faulhammer wrote: everyone working on bugs, please add all people from metadata.xml to the assignee or cc field, I regularly have to search for bugs where a team and I maintain a package because only the team has been added. Second, please use full atoms (cat-egory/package) in the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Bug wrangling

2008-09-08 Thread Dawid Węgliński
On Monday 08 of September 2008 22:22:12 Joe Peterson wrote: Christian Faulhammer wrote: everyone working on bugs, please add all people from metadata.xml to the assignee or cc field, I regularly have to search for bugs where a team and I maintain a package because only the team has been

Re: [gentoo-dev] Bug wrangling

2008-09-08 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Mon, 08 Sep 2008 14:22:12 -0600 Joe Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry if this answer can be found elsewhere, but if one has a proxy maintainer (i.e. not a Gentoo dev) for a package, can/should this person be added to metadata.xml? Is there a special tag for this? I can certainly

Re: [gentoo-dev] Bug wrangling

2008-09-08 Thread Josh Saddler
Joe Peterson wrote: Sorry if this answer can be found elsewhere, but if one has a proxy maintainer (i.e. not a Gentoo dev) for a package, can/should this person be added to metadata.xml? Is there a special tag for this? I can certainly see this being helpful (so that person automatically gets

Re: [gentoo-dev] Bug wrangling

2008-09-08 Thread Daniel Pielmeier
Joe Peterson schrieb am 08.09.2008 22:22: Sorry if this answer can be found elsewhere, but if one has a proxy maintainer (i.e. not a Gentoo dev) for a package, can/should this person be added to metadata.xml? Is there a special tag for this? I can certainly see this being helpful (so that

Re: [gentoo-dev] Bug wrangling

2008-09-08 Thread Santiago M. Mola
On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 10:38 PM, Dawid Węgliński [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Monday 08 of September 2008 22:22:12 Joe Peterson wrote: Christian Faulhammer wrote: everyone working on bugs, please add all people from metadata.xml to the assignee or cc field, I regularly have to search for bugs

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] EAPI 2 Draft

2008-09-08 Thread Donnie Berkholz
On 00:39 Fri 05 Sep , Zac Medico wrote: David Leverton wrote: 2008/9/5 Zac Medico [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Both approaches are essentially equivalent but it's a little simpler for ebuild writer if they don't have to customize the output file name. But is it so much simpler as to justify

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Ability to pass arguments to src_configure/src_compile

2008-09-08 Thread Donnie Berkholz
On 12:46 Sun 07 Sep , Marcus D. Hanwell wrote: I personally agree with several others who have replied to this thread. The reduction in lines of code/characters seems to introduce an uglier syntax which is harder to read with questionable benefits. One of the great things about ebuilds

[gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] PROPERTIES=virtual for meta-packages (clarification of definition)

2008-09-08 Thread Steve Long
Joe Peterson wrote: Ciaran McCreesh wrote: Except it doesn't. A virtual ebuild: * installs nothing * does nothing I'd say that virtual does indeed do something: it pulls in other packages. * should be treated as being very quickly installable * should be treated as having zero cost

[gentoo-dev] Re: Re: [RFC] EAPI 2 Draft

2008-09-08 Thread Steve Long
Alec Warner wrote: On Sat, Sep 6, 2008 at 4:43 AM, Steve Long [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Christian Faulhammer wrote: Zac Medico [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Both approaches are essentially equivalent but it's a little simpler for ebuild writer if they don't have to customize the output file name.

[gentoo-dev] Re: Re: [RFC] EAPI 2 Draft

2008-09-08 Thread Steve Long
Thomas Anderson wrote: On Sat, Sep 06, 2008 at 12:43:12PM +0100, Steve Long wrote: Christian Faulhammer wrote: Zac Medico [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Both approaches are essentially equivalent but it's a little simpler for ebuild writer if they don't have to customize the output file name.

[gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Ability to pass arguments to src_configure/src_compile

2008-09-08 Thread Steve Long
Ben de Groot wrote: It may be 2 lines less, but it is 42 characters more. Plus, I dislike caps. :-p Well the original patch used DEFAULT_CONFIG_ENABLE and DEFAULT_CONFIG_WITH and didn't invoke any subshells. I'm not sure what the thinking behind changing it was, unless it was a straight lift

Re: [gentoo-dev] Bug wrangling

2008-09-08 Thread Joe Peterson
Jeroen Roovers wrote: Sorry if this answer can be found elsewhere, but if one has a proxy maintainer (i.e. not a Gentoo dev) for a package, can/should this person be added to metadata.xml? Is there a special tag for this? I can certainly see this being helpful (so that person automatically

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] PROPERTIES=virtual for meta-packages (clarification of definition)

2008-09-08 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Mon, 08 Sep 2008 22:40:37 +0100 Steve Long [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * should be treated as being very quickly installable * should be treated as having zero cost for installs Both of which follow from installs nothing. Or would you disagree? No, they're separate properties, with

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Ability to pass arguments to src_configure/src_compile

2008-09-08 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 14:33:50 -0700 Donnie Berkholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 12:46 Sun 07 Sep , Marcus D. Hanwell wrote: I personally agree with several others who have replied to this thread. The reduction in lines of code/characters seems to introduce an uglier syntax which is harder

[gentoo-dev] Re: FHS compliant KDE install and multi-version support

2008-09-08 Thread Steve Long
Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote: The next step was to use a kdeprefix use flag[2]. This flag no longer touches the SLOT that is set to 4 for all kde-4.X versions. It only determines if the package will be installed under the FHS compliant location (/usr) or under the old location

[gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Ability to pass arguments to src_configure/src_compile

2008-09-08 Thread Steve Long
Vaeth wrote: The point is that in contrast to shell code you need additional pre-knowledge to read or write it. True. the syntax looks fine and the syntax is in fact still bash. I do not want to start a discussion now whether this is implicit semantic or sort of an extended syntax - it

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Ability to pass arguments to src_configure/src_compile

2008-09-08 Thread Donnie Berkholz
On 23:13 Mon 08 Sep , Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 14:33:50 -0700 Donnie Berkholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 12:46 Sun 07 Sep , Marcus D. Hanwell wrote: I personally agree with several others who have replied to this thread. The reduction in lines of code/characters

[gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Ability to pass arguments to src_configure/src_compile

2008-09-08 Thread Duncan
Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Mon, 08 Sep 2008 23:13:25 +0100: On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 14:33:50 -0700 Donnie Berkholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: One of the great things about ebuilds is that they're very natural to write in most cases, if you can

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Ability to pass arguments to src_configure/src_compile

2008-09-08 Thread Alec Warner
On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 4:03 PM, Donnie Berkholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 23:13 Mon 08 Sep , Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 14:33:50 -0700 Donnie Berkholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 12:46 Sun 07 Sep , Marcus D. Hanwell wrote: I personally agree with several others who

[gentoo-dev] EAPI-2

2008-09-08 Thread Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi again. Quoting Zac earlier in #gentoo-portage: 21:46 zmedico jmbsvicetto: I think we essentially have a spec already that people can agree on. just take my draft and subtract the eapi* functions and the gitweb unpack extension. So we're

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Ability to pass arguments to src_configure/src_compile

2008-09-08 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 23:20:15 + (UTC) Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What proportion of people do you think know whether or not you need a die with econf or emake? This is a valid point as well. However, for a user simply concerned with getting a functional ebuild so the package is

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: [RFC] EAPI 2 Draft

2008-09-08 Thread Alec Warner
On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 2:46 PM, Steve Long [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Alec Warner wrote: On Sat, Sep 6, 2008 at 4:43 AM, Steve Long [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Christian Faulhammer wrote: Zac Medico [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Both approaches are essentially equivalent but it's a little simpler for

Re: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for September

2008-09-08 Thread Tom Wesley
On Mon, Sep 01, 2008 at 05:30:01AM +, Mike Frysinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is your monthly friendly reminder ! Same bat time (typically the 2nd Thursday at 2000 UTC / 1600 EST), same bat channel (#gentoo-council @ irc.freenode.net) ! If you have something you'd wish for us to

[gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Ability to pass arguments to src_configure/src_compile

2008-09-08 Thread Duncan
Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Tue, 09 Sep 2008 00:38:48 +0100: People shouldn't be writing ebuilds to do that at all. They should be using a package manager provided tool that lets them keep track of ebuild-less packages in a way that

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Ability to pass arguments to src_configure/src_compile

2008-09-08 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Tue, 9 Sep 2008 00:58:52 + (UTC) Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Tue, 09 Sep 2008 00:38:48 +0100: People shouldn't be writing ebuilds to do that at all. They should be using a package manager provided

[gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Ability to pass arguments to src_configure/src_compile

2008-09-08 Thread Duncan
Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Tue, 09 Sep 2008 02:06:45 +0100: If you consider package.provided to be your package manager provided tool, you need a much better package manager. Paludis has 'importare' for tracking (with full uninstall,

Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI-2

2008-09-08 Thread Doug Goldstein
Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi again. Quoting Zac earlier in #gentoo-portage: 21:46 zmedico jmbsvicetto: I think we essentially have a spec already that people can agree on. just take my draft and subtract the eapi* functions and the gitweb