Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] emerge: add --search-fuzzy and --search-fuzzy-cutoff options (bug 65566)

On 04/08/2016 04:33 AM, Alexander Berntsen wrote: > On 08/04/16 08:21, Zac Medico wrote: >> Reverse? You want it to measure dissimilarity? Not sure what you >> mean. > Sorry, I meant reverse the *docs* to mean "find things that are at > least 50% similar" rather than "cut off things that aren't

[gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] emerge: add --fuzzy-search and --search-similarity (bug 65566)

Add --fuzzy-search option, and --search-similarity option to adjust the minimum similarity for search results (defaults to 80%). X-Gentoo-bug: 65566 X-Gentoo-bug-url: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=65566 --- man/emerge.1 | 14 ++ pym/_emerge/actions.py | 7 +--

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: News Item: OpenAFS no longer needs kernel option DEBUG_RODATA

Hi, On Sun, 24 Jul 2016 03:00:40 + (UTC) Duncan wrote: > Andrew Savchenko posted on Sun, 24 Jul 2016 00:30:39 +0300 as excerpted: > > > Do we ever had such case like multiple versions of the same > > single-slotted package installed or recorded as installed in the real > > world? I'm not

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] versionator.eclass: Add tests for parameter counts

On Sun, 24 Jul 2016 00:17:21 +0200 Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote: > Michał Górny schrieb: > > Ensure that proper number of parameters is passed to each versionator > > function; die otherwise. This prevents the functions from proceeding > > with undefined behavior when

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: News Item: OpenAFS no longer needs kernel option DEBUG_RODATA

On Sun, 24 Jul 2016 10:05:23 +0300 Andrew Savchenko wrote: > I agree with you, but REPLACING_VERSIONS has nothing to do with > such recovery. Yes, it does. Specifically, what we want is for developers to get into the habit of writing safe, clean code, even if they think they

Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: OpenAFS no longer needs kernel option DEBUG_RODATA

On Sun, 24 Jul 2016 00:04:53 +0200 "Andreas K. Huettel" wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA512 > > Am Freitag, 22. Juli 2016, 15:57:36 schrieb Ciaran McCreesh: > > > > > Wrong. PMS specifically requests you to account for such a > > > > possibility.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] versionator.eclass: Add tests for parameter counts

Michał Górny schrieb: You are changing the API of versionator.eclass, even if it was unintentional API. There is no such thing as 'unintentional API'. API is what's described. If you rely on internals, random undefined behaviors or whatever, it's not a part of the API. Well there is the API

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] versionator.eclass: Add tests for parameter counts

On Sun, 24 Jul 2016 12:17:56 +0200 Michał Górny wrote: > But that's a social problem that could easily solved by more > proactive retirements, and not a good API design point. You need some trained and payed PR people to correct your writings before they go to press or you

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] versionator.eclass: Add tests for parameter counts

On Sun, 24 Jul 2016 10:17:24 +0200 Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote: > > Then ebuilds will fail just the same > > No. Before, ebuilds would maybe display an upgrading message when > they shouldn't, or vice versa. Now the eclass dies on them. As a side note: die-ing in

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] versionator.eclass: Add tests for parameter counts

On Sun, 24 Jul 2016 12:17:56 +0200 Michał Górny wrote: > So what's the alternative? Design another eclass where ebuilds will > fail just the same because people will ignore the more explicit > requirement just the same as they do ignore the API? Sometimes you don't need a

[gentoo-dev] Automated Package Removal and Addition Tracker, for the week ending 2016-07-24 23:59 UTC

The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or removed from the tree, for the week ending 2016-07-24 23:59 UTC. Removals: app-cdr/dvd95 20160724-11:25 mgorny 37d88cd app-portage/g-ctan 20160724-10:45 mgorny abca5f5 dev-libs/vdk

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] versionator.eclass: Add tests for parameter counts

On Sun, 24 Jul 2016 10:17:24 +0200 Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote: > > Then ebuilds will fail just the same > > No. Before, ebuilds would maybe display an upgrading message when > they shouldn't, or vice versa. Now the eclass dies on them. This attitude that invisible

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] versionator.eclass: Add tests for parameter counts

Michał Górny schrieb: So, to summarize we shouldn't fix existing code because people did assume accepting invalid parameters was fine. You are changing the API of versionator.eclass, even if it was unintentional API. Then ebuilds will fail just the same No. Before, ebuilds would maybe

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] versionator.eclass: Add tests for parameter counts

On Sun, 24 Jul 2016 10:17:24 +0200 Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote: > Michał Górny schrieb: > > So, to summarize we shouldn't fix existing code because people did > > assume accepting invalid parameters was fine. > > You are changing the API of versionator.eclass, even

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] versionator.eclass: Add tests for parameter counts

Ciaran McCreesh schrieb: On Sun, 24 Jul 2016 10:17:24 +0200 Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote: Then ebuilds will fail just the same No. Before, ebuilds would maybe display an upgrading message when they shouldn't, or vice versa. Now the eclass dies on them. This

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] versionator.eclass: Add tests for parameter counts

> On Sun, 24 Jul 2016, Michał Górny wrote: > There is no such thing as 'unintentional API'. API is what's > described. If you rely on internals, random undefined behaviors > or whatever, it's not a part of the API. Like memcpy(3) direction? Ulrich pgpaBBWxp15uE.pgp Description: PGP

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] versionator.eclass: Add tests for parameter counts

On Sun, Jul 24, 2016 at 10:17:24AM +0200, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote: > Michał Górny schrieb: > > So, to summarize we shouldn't fix existing code because people did > > assume accepting invalid parameters was fine. > > You are changing the API of versionator.eclass, even if it was

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] versionator.eclass: Add tests for parameter counts

Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn schrieb: I don't say it is a correct use of versionator.eclass. I just say it has become (unintentionally) part of the API, and therefore is subject to the rules about changing APIs in eclasses. Actually, after reading those rules[1] again, it would be enough to