Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Duplicated entries in use.desc and use.local.desc
Le Sun, 12 Feb 2006 21:39:22 -0600, R Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit : TGL did some work on this under bug #84884, though his changes are more invasive than what i had in mind. I don't see the need for portage to dig through use.*desc when euse already works and equery can pretty easily be made to. If this special USE descriptions (the one in use.local.desc when the flag is also global) are allowed, then it's in emerge -pv output that displaying them is the most useful. Nobody wants to manually call euses for each package he's about to emerge/update just in case one of the well known flags they use has a special description. That's something that should simply come to his attention when it's the case, it's much easier this way. IIRC, the behavior of my patch was that when the --use-desc-special option was used, and some packages/flags in the list had special descriptions, the relevant informations were displayed at the end of the usual output: % emerge -puvD --use-desc-special world ... [ebuild U ] net-ftp/pure-ftpd-1.0.20-r2 -caps -ldap mysql pam -postgres ssl -vchroot [ebuild U ] ... ... These USE flags have a package-specific description: pure-ftpd:mysql - Allow storing accounts infos in a MySQL DB ... Note that this patch doesn't makes portage diging through use.*desc when this option is not used. As for the two other patches (repoman and equery), it was just some code cleanup (remove their own duplicate implementation of use*.desc parsers, to replace it with some shared code). Anyways I just like anything that makes use.desc more useful than foo - adds support for foo In many cases, you just can't give a better description for a global flag, because it has two much different purposes depending on the context (the package using it). Take the mysql flag, i think it's a typical example of global flag with different meanings: many users will enable it thinking of the PHP bindings, whereas they don't care about using a MySQL DB to store their FTP accounts or their music collection metadatas. Or even take some less widely used flags, like sqlite3; on just six packages using it, it can be: - add sqlite support (which happens to be v3 only) - add support for sqlite3 (may be in addition to the v2 controlled by the sqlite flag) - use sqlite3 for backend (but v2 has priority if sqlite is enabled) - use sqlite3 for backend (and die if sqlite is enabled too) Again, the global description (Adds support for sqlite3) is vague enough to seem ~correct in all cases, but actually gives no clue about what turning on the flag means. -- TGL. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Duplicated entries in use.desc and use.local.desc
R Hill wrote: a global USE flag duplicated in use.local.desc could be used to give specific information about exactly what effect the flag has on a certain package, or if for some reason it does differ slightly from the global meaning. global use flags (searching: doc) [-] doc - Adds extra documentation (API, Javadoc, etc) local use flags (searching: doc) [-] doc (app-examples/fakeapp): Build user manuals in PDF format (requires ps2pdf) That'd be bad practice. When a new global use flag is made, the requirement is that all local use flags which would get united have *the same meaning*. If the meaning is the same, it doesn't make sense to mention it twice. If the meaning differs (slightly or not), it should get a local use flag. -- Simon Stelling Gentoo/AMD64 Operational Co-Lead [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Duplicated entries in use.desc and use.local.desc
On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 17:49:26 +0100 Simon Stelling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: R Hill wrote: a global USE flag duplicated in use.local.desc could be used to give specific information about exactly what effect the flag has on a certain package, or if for some reason it does differ slightly from the global meaning. global use flags (searching: doc) [-] doc - Adds extra documentation (API, Javadoc, etc) local use flags (searching: doc) [-] doc (app-examples/fakeapp): Build user manuals in PDF format (requires ps2pdf) That'd be bad practice. When a new global use flag is made, the requirement is that all local use flags which would get united have *the same meaning*. If the meaning is the same, it doesn't make sense to mention it twice. If the meaning differs (slightly or not), it should get a local use flag. IIRC the idea behind duplication was not to use a flag for different purposes, but have a generic description in use.desc (like doc: build additional docs) and give a more detailed description in use.local.desc (like doc: build API docs and manual as pdf and html). See http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.portage.devel/618 and http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/26035 for the original threads about this. -- Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Duplicated entries in use.desc and use.local.desc
Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: IIRC the idea behind duplication was not to use a flag for different purposes, but have a generic description in use.desc (like doc: build additional docs) and give a more detailed description in use.local.desc (like doc: build API docs and manual as pdf and html). See http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.portage.devel/618 and http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/26035 for the original threads about this. In all of the examples I have seen it seems that the more detailed description doesn't really give that much more useful information. It just seems to be duplicating the same information in different words. Currently the flags I found in both use.desc and use.local.desc are exact copies, so I will talk to the maintainers for those packages and make sure they are alright with removing their entry. On a more global scale, we should decide if this is valid though. I haven't exactly been convinced that it is useful, but I'm not opposed to the idea. I'd just like to see a decision one way or another. -- Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86) email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org mark AT halcy0n DOT com web - http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/ http://www.halcy0n.com pgpdWFbh3JH5A.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Duplicated entries in use.desc and use.local.desc
On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 14:49:55 -0500 Mark Loeser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: IIRC the idea behind duplication was not to use a flag for different purposes, but have a generic description in use.desc (like doc: build additional docs) and give a more detailed description in use.local.desc (like doc: build API docs and manual as pdf and html). See http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.portage.devel/618 and http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/26035 for the original threads about this. In all of the examples I have seen it seems that the more detailed description doesn't really give that much more useful information. It just seems to be duplicating the same information in different words. Currently the flags I found in both use.desc and use.local.desc are exact copies, so I will talk to the maintainers for those packages and make sure they are alright with removing their entry. For the record, I didn't look at the current cases nor do I have a positions for or against the idea, just providing some general background info. On a more global scale, we should decide if this is valid though. I haven't exactly been convinced that it is useful, but I'm not opposed to the idea. I'd just like to see a decision one way or another. Yeah, unfortunately none of the people proposing the idea ever wrote a glep or even filed a bug regarding this (AFAIK), also as the quoted threads show there are a number of possible solutions for this. Marius -- Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Duplicated entries in use.desc and use.local.desc
Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Yeah, unfortunately none of the people proposing the idea ever wrote a glep or even filed a bug regarding this (AFAIK), also as the quoted threads show there are a number of possible solutions for this. It doesn't seem that too many people feel strongly in favor of it (judging by responses so far), so why don't we just say that it is invalid until such a time where someone can come up with real-life examples where this would prove to be beneficial. Is this something that repoman could check for (should I file a bug), or just something to keep my eye out for? I don't see this as a groundbreaking change that requires a GLEP or anything, especially since I eliminated most of the duplicates today, after talking with the respective maintainers. There are probably only 3 or 4 left. -- Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86) email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org mark AT halcy0n DOT com web - http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/ http://www.halcy0n.com pgp6bP1klamaJ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Duplicated entries in use.desc and use.local.desc
R Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Anyways I just like anything that makes use.desc more useful than foo - adds support for foo That's really a completely separate issue. By allowing duplicate entries we just allow people to put useless information in two places instead of one. -- Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86) email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org mark AT halcy0n DOT com web - http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/ http://www.halcy0n.com pgpbhl8GXhU3b.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Duplicated entries in use.desc and use.local.desc
On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 22:19:29 -0500 Mark Loeser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | I don't see this as a groundbreaking change that requires a GLEP or | anything, especially since I eliminated most of the duplicates today, | after talking with the respective maintainers. There are probably | only 3 or 4 left. The original someone should GLEP this was on adding extended USE flag descriptions to metadata.xml. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Wearer of the shiny hat) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm signature.asc Description: PGP signature
