Re: [gentoo-dev] Dying on some CFLAGS instead of filtering them.

2006-07-15 Thread Denis Dupeyron

On 7/9/06, Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Basically, if you're using daft CFLAGS you're on your own. Some ebuilds
might filter them, some ebuilds might die and some ebuilds might let
them through. Developers are under no obligation to add code to save
users from their own stupidity, but they might do so if you ask nicely.


Please re-read all the words in the previous messages. What I would
like to discuss is not about helping users, but about making our job
easier.

Denis.
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list



Re: [gentoo-dev] Dying on some CFLAGS instead of filtering them.

2006-07-15 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 13:54:52 +0200 Denis Dupeyron
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| On 7/9/06, Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
|  Basically, if you're using daft CFLAGS you're on your own. Some
|  ebuilds might filter them, some ebuilds might die and some ebuilds
|  might let them through. Developers are under no obligation to add
|  code to save users from their own stupidity, but they might do so
|  if you ask nicely.
| 
| Please re-read all the words in the previous messages. What I would
| like to discuss is not about helping users, but about making our job
| easier.

If you want your job to be easier, just INVALID any bug that comes in
with daft CFLAGS...

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh
Mail: ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk


-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list



Re: [gentoo-dev] Dying on some CFLAGS instead of filtering them.

2006-07-10 Thread Richard Fish

On 7/9/06, Denis Dupeyron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

2) If yes, are there any other flags that ebuilds should die on ?


My (user) opinion is that ebuilds should not die on CFLAGS, at least
not until per-package CFLAGS are implemented.

Now if someone is crazy enough to enable -ffast-math globally or
specifically for python in that situation, well, die, spin the cpu fan
backwards, melt the hard disk down and sell it for scrap, whatever you
want!

-Richard
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list



Re: [gentoo-dev] Dying on some CFLAGS instead of filtering them.

2006-07-10 Thread Ned Ludd
On Mon, 2006-07-10 at 01:34 -0700, Richard Fish wrote:
 On 7/9/06, Denis Dupeyron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  2) If yes, are there any other flags that ebuilds should die on ?
 
 My (user) opinion is that ebuilds should not die on CFLAGS, at least
 not until per-package CFLAGS are implemented.

per pkg cflags are here already it would fall under the per 
pkg env variables.


-- 
Ned Ludd [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gentoo Linux

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list



Re: [gentoo-dev] Dying on some CFLAGS instead of filtering them.

2006-07-10 Thread Patrick McLean
Denis Dupeyron wrote:
 This, for me, triggers 3 questions that are gentoo-dev@ material :
 
 1) Should all ebuilds that currently filter --fast-math die on its
 presence instead of filtering it ?

I don't think we should die on anything, if a user wants a particular
CFLAG, generally the default should be to let them use it. A warning
with a pause may also suffice.

Currently the amd64 profiles do some testing for broken USE flags. If
the user has flags that gcc will not accept (ie errors out with invalid
command line option), our profile.bashrc will filter them out
completely. If they have a flag that is on a list of pre-defined bad
flags it will warn the user about the flag and sleep for 5 seconds.
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list



Re: [gentoo-dev] Dying on some CFLAGS instead of filtering them.

2006-07-10 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
[ resending this, the original appears to have been eaten. ]

On Sun, 9 Jul 2006 23:24:24 +0200 Denis Dupeyron [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| 1) Should all ebuilds that currently filter --fast-math die on its
| presence instead of filtering it ?

http://devmanual.gentoo.org/ebuild-writing/functions/src_compile/build-environment/index.html

Basically, if you're using daft CFLAGS you're on your own. Some ebuilds
might filter them, some ebuilds might die and some ebuilds might let
them through. Developers are under no obligation to add code to save
users from their own stupidity, but they might do so if you ask nicely.

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh
Mail: ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk


-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list



Re: [gentoo-dev] Dying on some CFLAGS instead of filtering them.

2006-07-10 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Sun, 9 Jul 2006 23:24:24 +0200 Denis Dupeyron [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| 1) Should all ebuilds that currently filter --fast-math die on its
| presence instead of filtering it ?

http://devmanual.gentoo.org/ebuild-writing/functions/src_compile/build-environment/index.html

Basically, if you're using daft CFLAGS you're on your own. Some ebuilds
might filter them, some ebuilds might die and some ebuilds might let
them through. Developers are under no obligation to add code to save
users from their own stupidity, but they might do so if you ask nicely.

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh
Mail: ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk


-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list



Re: [gentoo-dev] Dying on some CFLAGS instead of filtering them.

2006-07-10 Thread Richard Fish

On 7/10/06, Ned Ludd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

per pkg cflags are here already it would fall under the per
pkg env variables.


Please forgive my stupidity, but the only place I could see to set a
env var per package was /etc/portage/bashrc.  Is that what you are
referring to?

-Richard
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list



Re: [gentoo-dev] Dying on some CFLAGS instead of filtering them.

2006-07-10 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Richard Fish wrote:
 On 7/10/06, Ned Ludd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 per pkg cflags are here already it would fall under the per
 pkg env variables.
 
 Please forgive my stupidity, but the only place I could see to set a
 env var per package was /etc/portage/bashrc.  Is that what you are
 referring to?

You're close.  There is now a per-package bashrc implementation included in 
$PORTDIR/profiles/base/profile.bashrc.  It's kind of silly imo, when the user 
can simply put that same code in /etc/portage/bashrc, but this is how it is. :)

Zac
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFEsolv/ejvha5XGaMRAkeoAJ95/lUC/pSZHeo09JOp/PCOx0HkxwCgoBVl
zJW3/SnRt48YXixrIFxt+zo=
=mg/P
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list



Re: [gentoo-dev] Dying on some CFLAGS instead of filtering them.

2006-07-10 Thread Richard Fish

On 7/10/06, Zac Medico [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Richard Fish wrote:
 On 7/10/06, Ned Ludd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 per pkg cflags are here already it would fall under the per
 pkg env variables.

 Please forgive my stupidity, but the only place I could see to set a
 env var per package was /etc/portage/bashrc.  Is that what you are
 referring to?

You're close.  There is now a per-package bashrc implementation included in 
$PORTDIR/profiles/base/profile.bashrc.  It's kind of silly imo, when the user 
can simply put that same code in /etc/portage/bashrc, but this is how it is. :)


Ah, thanks, I see it now.

I have to say I dislike allowing this backdoor method to set CFLAGS,
as they won't show up in emerge --info or emerge -pv pkg.  You'd
have to see the actual build output to see the nasty flags, which you
might not even think to ask for if a package builds fine but crashes
randomly later.

-Richard
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list



Re: [gentoo-dev] Dying on some CFLAGS instead of filtering them.

2006-07-10 Thread Simon Stelling
Richard Fish wrote:
 I have to say I dislike allowing this backdoor method to set CFLAGS,
 as they won't show up in emerge --info or emerge -pv pkg.  You'd
 have to see the actual build output to see the nasty flags, which you
 might not even think to ask for if a package builds fine but crashes
 randomly later.

Sounds like your after bug 95741:
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=95741

-- 
Kind Regards,

Simon Stelling
Gentoo/AMD64 Developer
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list



Re: [gentoo-dev] Dying on some CFLAGS instead of filtering them.

2006-07-10 Thread Richard Fish

On 7/10/06, Simon Stelling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Sounds like your after bug 95741:
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=95741


Yeah, that would be nice! :-)

-Richard
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list



Re: [gentoo-dev] Dying on some CFLAGS instead of filtering them.

2006-07-10 Thread Donnie Berkholz
Richard Fish wrote:
 I have to say I dislike allowing this backdoor method to set CFLAGS,
 as they won't show up in emerge --info or emerge -pv pkg.  You'd
 have to see the actual build output to see the nasty flags, which you
 might not even think to ask for if a package builds fine but crashes
 randomly later.

How about `cat /var/db/pkg/$category/$package-$version/CFLAGS`? You
can't rely on emerge --info anyway, because it shows _current_ flags
rather than flags the package was built with.

Thanks,
Donnie



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature