Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-16 Thread Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
2013-06-15 17:51 Rich Freeman napisał(a): Plus, right now with Gentoo there is no way to set an overlay as being LOWER priority than the main tree - so that you can grab packages not supported in main from an overlay but still use the main packages when available. Portage has been supporting

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-16 Thread Luca Barbato
On 06/16/2013 02:24 AM, Zac Medico wrote: How about it we add a src_fetch phase, so that the VCS intricacies can be delegated to ebuilds/eclasses (like they are now, but without having to abuse src_unpack). If we include a way for src_fetch to communicate changes in VCS revisions to the

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-16 Thread Georg Rudoy
2013/6/16 Zac Medico zmed...@gentoo.org: How about it we add a src_fetch phase, so that the VCS intricacies can be delegated to ebuilds/eclasses (like they are now, but without having to abuse src_unpack). If we include a way for src_fetch to communicate changes in VCS revisions to the package

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-16 Thread Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov
I'd like that behaviour! 16.06.2013 07:24, Zac Medico пишет: How about it we add a src_fetch phase, so that the VCS intricacies can be delegated to ebuilds/eclasses (like they are now, but without having to abuse src_unpack). If we include a way for src_fetch to communicate changes in VCS

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-16 Thread Rick Zero_Chaos Farina
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 06/15/2013 08:24 PM, Zac Medico wrote: On 06/15/2013 06:05 AM, Michał Górny wrote: Dnia 2013-06-15, o godz. 15:56:53 Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov m...@mva.name napisał(a): And, moreover, I guess, SRC_URI can even be used for VCS: SRC_URI=

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Diego Elio Pettenò
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov m...@mva.namewrote: And, moreover, I guess, SRC_URI can even be used for VCS: SRC_URI= git+ssh://github.com/lol/moo.git hg+ssh://bitbucket.org/lol/moo svn+ssh://assembla.com/lol/moo Over my dead CVS

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Rich Freeman
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 7:50 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò flamee...@flameeyes.eu wrote: On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov m...@mva.name wrote: And, moreover, I guess, SRC_URI can even be used for VCS: SRC_URI= git+ssh://github.com/lol/moo.git

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Diego Elio Pettenò
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote: Grandstanding aside, it is probably best to take this in chunks. I just don't care to repeat for the Nth time the same reasoning for which I don't want to mainstream VCS fetching. It's just not going to happen as long as I

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov
15.06.2013 18:50, Diego Elio Pettenò пишет: Over my dead CVS access. Any reasonable/argumented objection? And, anyway, quoted part is optional behaviour that should just make ebuild-writing easy. Mandatory part is to be able to have restrict://foo.bar and downloadable things at the same time.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Alexander V Vershilov
On 15 June 2013 15:50, Diego Elio Pettenò flamee...@flameeyes.eu wrote: On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov m...@mva.name wrote: And, moreover, I guess, SRC_URI can even be used for VCS: SRC_URI= git+ssh://github.com/lol/moo.git

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Diego Elio Pettenò
On 15/06/2013 13:48, Alexander V Vershilov wrote: Can you elaborate: do you object both proposals (about partial restrict and VCS-support) or only second one (VCS-support)? As I already said in my answer to Rich, the VCS support is XOR'd with my CVS access. And I've already spent too much

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Michał Górny
Dnia 2013-06-15, o godz. 15:56:53 Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov m...@mva.name napisał(a): And, moreover, I guess, SRC_URI can even be used for VCS: SRC_URI= git+ssh://github.com/lol/moo.git hg+ssh://bitbucket.org/lol/moo svn+ssh://assembla.com/lol/moo It simply can't work.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Rich Freeman
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 8:14 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò flamee...@flameeyes.eu wrote: It's just not going to happen as long as I got CVS access, it's not a threat or a grandstanding, it's a simple boolean logic statement. That IS grandstanding. I'm not saying I disagree with the position you

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov
15.06.2013 20:05, Michał Górny пишет: It simply can't work. Don't even try to implement, it's waste of time. As I already metioned to Diego — VCS part is just optional example of that things, that can be useful. Mainly idea in partial restricting. And I suggest you all (including Diego) to

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Diego Elio Pettenò
On 15/06/2013 14:06, Rich Freeman wrote: At work just about every boss I have had any respect for would have fired me on the spot for making such a statement and not retracting it At work you're also paid to for the time you spend justifying for the Nth time why a proposal is completely crazy

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Diego Elio Pettenò
On 15/06/2013 14:11, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov wrote: And I suggest you all (including Diego) to discuss about that, instead of oppositing vcs-related SRC_URI ;) Then next time don't collapse two widely different proposals, especially considering that one of the two has been already discussed

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Andreas K. Huettel
Am Samstag, 15. Juni 2013, 15:15:57 schrieb Diego Elio Pettenò: On 15/06/2013 14:06, Rich Freeman wrote: At work just about every boss I have had any respect for would have fired me on the spot for making such a statement and not retracting it At work you're also paid to for the time you

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Ulrich Mueller
On Sat, 15 Jun 2013, Rich Freeman wrote: Over my dead CVS access. Grandstanding aside, it is probably best to take this in chunks. The all-or-nothing fetch restriction control does seem like a good place to start improving. I could certainly see where that could create needless problems.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Diego Elio Pettenò
On 15/06/2013 14:34, Ulrich Mueller wrote: restrict+http: (as suggested by the OP) is probably not enough because it doesn't distinguish between fetch and mirror restriction. nofetch+http and nomirror+http ? -- Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes flamee...@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Ulrich Mueller
On Sat, 15 Jun 2013, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: restrict+http: (as suggested by the OP) is probably not enough because it doesn't distinguish between fetch and mirror restriction. nofetch+http and nomirror+http ? Or the other way around: {fetch,mirror}+http. I'd rather have RESTRICT apply

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Luca Barbato
On 06/15/2013 02:34 PM, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov wrote: 15.06.2013 18:50, Diego Elio Pettenò пишет: Over my dead CVS access. Any reasonable/argumented objection? to put in different words: We do not want to use untraceable/transient/ephemeral sources for main ebuilds, live ebuilds are corner

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Diego Elio Pettenò
On 15/06/2013 14:47, Ulrich Mueller wrote: Or the other way around: {fetch,mirror}+http. I'd rather have RESTRICT apply to all of SRC_URI (as it is now) and use the new syntax to specify any exceptions from the restriction. WFM -- Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes flamee...@flameeyes.eu —

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Pacho Ramos
El sáb, 15-06-2013 a las 12:50 +0100, Diego Elio Pettenò escribió: On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov m...@mva.name wrote: And, moreover, I guess, SRC_URI can even be used for VCS: SRC_URI=

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Rick Zero_Chaos Farina
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 06/15/2013 04:56 AM, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov wrote: Sometimes I find myself in a situation, when I need to use both RESTRICT=fetch for the main distfile and allow fetch for additional ones (langpacks, extensions and so on). Sometimes it is

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Brian Dolbec
On Sat, 2013-06-15 at 15:05 +0200, Michał Górny wrote: Dnia 2013-06-15, o godz. 15:56:53 Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov m...@mva.name napisał(a): And, moreover, I guess, SRC_URI can even be used for VCS: SRC_URI= git+ssh://github.com/lol/moo.git hg+ssh://bitbucket.org/lol/moo

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Rich Freeman
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Brian Dolbec dol...@gentoo.org wrote: The other thing is that would put a mandatory system requirement on layman which many of the devs would be opposed to. But, there is an open bug calling for it to be merged with portage... Honestly, native support for

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Luca Barbato
On 06/15/2013 05:33 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Brian Dolbec dol...@gentoo.org wrote: The other thing is that would put a mandatory system requirement on layman which many of the devs would be opposed to. But, there is an open bug calling for it to be merged with

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Rich Freeman
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 11:43 AM, Luca Barbato lu_z...@gentoo.org wrote: On 06/15/2013 05:33 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Brian Dolbec dol...@gentoo.org wrote: The other thing is that would put a mandatory system requirement on layman which many of the devs would

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 15:56:53 +0700 Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov m...@mva.name wrote: Sometimes I find myself in a situation, when I need to use both RESTRICT=fetch for the main distfile and allow fetch for additional ones (langpacks, extensions and so on). Sometimes it is even impossible to split

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 11:51:03 -0400 Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote: The approach paludis uses just seems simpler all-around, minus the fact that it doesn't provide defaults for internals that need not be exposed (vdb and such - which admittedly aren't needed by exherbo). I've not heard

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Anthony G. Basile
On 06/15/2013 11:43 AM, Luca Barbato wrote: On 06/15/2013 05:33 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Brian Dolbec dol...@gentoo.org wrote: The other thing is that would put a mandatory system requirement on layman which many of the devs would be opposed to. But, there is

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Michael Weber
On 06/15/2013 02:14 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: It's just not going to happen as long as I got CVS access, it's not a?T threat or a grandstanding, it's a simple boolean logic statement. Step away then. -- Michael Weber Gentoo Developer web: https://xmw.de/ mailto: Michael Weber

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Diego Elio Pettenò
On 15/06/2013 22:15, Michael Weber wrote: It's just not going to happen as long as I got CVS access, it's not a?T threat or a grandstanding, it's a simple boolean logic statement. Step away then. You know what? I really should just leave and see how people who think that a live ebild is a

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Diego Elio Pettenò
On 15/06/2013 22:17, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: You know what? I really should just leave and see how people who think that a live ebild is a nice idea will ruin it. It's not like I depend on Gentoo for my work anymore. Oh wait, I already know how that's going to happen.. bug #443448 is a nice

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Michael Weber
On 06/15/2013 11:17 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: On 15/06/2013 22:15, Michael Weber wrote: It's just not going to happen as long as I got CVS access, it's not a?T threat or a grandstanding, it's a simple boolean logic statement. Step away then. You know what? I really should just leave and

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Markos Chandras
On 15 June 2013 22:21, Michael Weber x...@gentoo.org wrote: On 06/15/2013 11:17 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: On 15/06/2013 22:15, Michael Weber wrote: It's just not going to happen as long as I got CVS access, it's not a?T threat or a grandstanding, it's a simple boolean logic statement.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Diego Elio Pettenò
On 15/06/2013 22:21, Michael Weber wrote: Fine, we would all benefit from a environment without your snappy comments and cryptic responses. Seriously, learn some social skill in your free time. See, I cannot exactly voice what my opinion of you is on a public forum, or I would have done so.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Michael Weber
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 06/15/2013 05:12 PM, Rick Zero_Chaos Farina wrote: There is currently no need for improvement in my eyes, and I'm not sure this could be considered improvement anyway. i.e. git-2.eclass provides support for environment override (and variables)

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Michael Weber
On 06/15/2013 11:24 PM, Markos Chandras wrote: Please both of you. Stop it now and take it elsewhere. Consider this a friendly warning. Agreed. Sorry for my impulsive response. I don't say thanks for the warning, but for your counseling of the mailing list. I'm on a borderline between

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Rick Zero_Chaos Farina
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 06/15/2013 05:15 PM, Michael Weber wrote: On 06/15/2013 02:14 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: It's just not going to happen as long as I got CVS access, it's not a?T threat or a grandstanding, it's a simple boolean logic statement. Step away

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] SRC_URI behaviour

2013-06-15 Thread Zac Medico
On 06/15/2013 06:05 AM, Michał Górny wrote: Dnia 2013-06-15, o godz. 15:56:53 Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov m...@mva.name napisał(a): And, moreover, I guess, SRC_URI can even be used for VCS: SRC_URI= git+ssh://github.com/lol/moo.git hg+ssh://bitbucket.org/lol/moo