Re: [gentoo-dev] NEWS item for games destabling

[Alec Warner]

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 3:44 PM, Michael Orlitzky  wrote:

> On 11/27/2017 03:37 PM, Arve Barsnes wrote:
> >
> > Sounds kind of weird? If he has keyworded the game package, shouldn't it
> > just never install that version if it depends on an unstable package?
>
> That's right, but if there are two available ~arch versions, one of
> which has all stable dependencies and (the newer) one of which has all
> ~arch dependencies, then portage will try to install the newer one and
> tell you to keyword a million things -- even though it could install the
> first one with less hassle.
>
>
In theory the resolver could support such a scheme, no?

Currently it prefers "best_visible" where best == "highest version"

But other predicates might be possible like "tightest_visible"

Note that currently best_visible is fairly straightforward to implement:

visible = find_all_visible()
best_visible = max(visible) # simple ver_cmp

tightest_visible:
visible = find_all_visible()
tightest_visible = min(visible, key=cpv.tightness)

# A weird predicate where 'tightness' implies dependencies are already
visible? I can't think of a better term.
def tightness(self):
  return len([atom for atom in self.dependencies if atom.is_visible()])

So "tighter" packages have dependencies that are visible / installed.
"Loose" packages have unmet dependencies or dependencies that are not
currently visible.

I have not messed with the portage resolver in some time; in theory given
perfect code you just plum this in once
but I'm skeptical its that easy (and I suspect best_visible is in fact
'presumed' in many places.

But Zac would probably know best.

-A



> For example, if you're on a system with no ruby packages, then it's the
> difference between having to keyword 10 packages for rails-x.y.z versus
> 200 packages for rails-x.y.(z+1). I'd rather have the slightly older
> version that requires less configuration.
>
>
>

Re: [gentoo-dev] NEWS item for games destabling

[Arve Barsnes]

On 27 November 2017 at 20:44, Michael Orlitzky  wrote:

> On 11/27/2017 03:37 PM, Arve Barsnes wrote:
> >
> > Sounds kind of weird? If he has keyworded the game package, shouldn't it
> > just never install that version if it depends on an unstable package?
>
> That's right, but if there are two available ~arch versions, one of
> which has all stable dependencies and (the newer) one of which has all
> ~arch dependencies, then portage will try to install the newer one and
> tell you to keyword a million things -- even though it could install the
> first one with less hassle.
>
> Ah, hadn't thought of that scenario. Reading the emerge man pages, I would
try the --autounmask-keep-masks option, but emerge might never consider
anything but the latest stable version either way.

Re: [gentoo-dev] NEWS item for games destabling

[M. J. Everitt]

On 27/11/17 20:44, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 11/27/2017 03:37 PM, Arve Barsnes wrote:
>> Sounds kind of weird? If he has keyworded the game package, shouldn't it
>> just never install that version if it depends on an unstable package?
> That's right, but if there are two available ~arch versions, one of
> which has all stable dependencies and (the newer) one of which has all
> ~arch dependencies, then portage will try to install the newer one and
> tell you to keyword a million things -- even though it could install the
> first one with less hassle.
>
> For example, if you're on a system with no ruby packages, then it's the
> difference between having to keyword 10 packages for rails-x.y.z versus
> 200 packages for rails-x.y.(z+1). I'd rather have the slightly older
> version that requires less configuration.
>
>
You might achieve something with one of the new
"autounmask-keep-keywords" -type parameters to portage .. although YMMV,
etc ...



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] NEWS item for games destabling

[Michael Orlitzky]

On 11/27/2017 03:37 PM, Arve Barsnes wrote:
> 
> Sounds kind of weird? If he has keyworded the game package, shouldn't it
> just never install that version if it depends on an unstable package?

That's right, but if there are two available ~arch versions, one of
which has all stable dependencies and (the newer) one of which has all
~arch dependencies, then portage will try to install the newer one and
tell you to keyword a million things -- even though it could install the
first one with less hassle.

For example, if you're on a system with no ruby packages, then it's the
difference between having to keyword 10 packages for rails-x.y.z versus
200 packages for rails-x.y.(z+1). I'd rather have the slightly older
version that requires less configuration.

Re: [gentoo-dev] NEWS item for games destabling

[Arve Barsnes]

On 27 November 2017 at 20:34, Rich Freeman  wrote:

> To answer his question, there is not any way out-of-the-box to tell
> portage to install the latest ~arch version of a package that has only
> stable or already-accepted dependencies.  Certainly it should be
> possible to build such a feature, but it doesn't exist today.
>

Sounds kind of weird? If he has keyworded the game package, shouldn't it
just never install that version if it depends on an unstable package? I
know I've seen errors of that kind on a machine running stable, but
shouldn't emerge just skip the package update if you can't satisfy its
dependencies? In my head it sounds like that should be something of a
default, but maybe I'm missing something.

Re: [gentoo-dev] NEWS item for games destabling

[M. J. Everitt]

On 27/11/17 20:34, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 3:15 PM, M. J. Everitt  wrote:
>> On 27/11/17 18:44, Christopher Head wrote:
>>> For those of us who run mostly stable systems, there is one question I 
>>> don’t know a good answer to.
>>>
>>> If I add a specific version of a game to package.accept_keywords, I will 
>>> get that version forever. That’s not really what I want: I prefer to stay 
>>> up to date as new versions are packaged.
>>>
>>> If I add just a cat/pkg to p.a_k, Portage will always try to pull in the 
>>> latest version. If that version has some unstable dependencies which I 
>>> haven’t also accepted, Portage will yell at me. An example of this is 
>>> games-emulation/mednafen-0.9.46 depending on dev-libs/lzo-2.10, the latter 
>>> of which is unstable.
>>>
>>> What I really want to install is, “the latest version of the package that 
>>> doesn’t pull in any deps that aren’t available (stable or accepted),” but I 
>>> don’t know any way to tell Portage that. Am I missing something, or is that 
>>> indeed impossible?
>> Sounds to me a failure in adhering to the stabilisation criterion that
>> state that all deps must be stabilised FIRST .. as the bugzilla
>> stable-bot will now automagically check ...
>>
> Nobody is stabilizing anything.  That is the whole reason he raised
> that concern.  He wants to use ~arch versions of games, with stable
> dependencies.
>
> To answer his question, there is not any way out-of-the-box to tell
> portage to install the latest ~arch version of a package that has only
> stable or already-accepted dependencies.  Certainly it should be
> possible to build such a feature, but it doesn't exist today.
>
Ah my apologies .. that's definitely what most would consider a bit of
an 'edge case' then ..

Thanks for the clarification, Rich.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] NEWS item for games destabling

[Rich Freeman]

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 3:15 PM, M. J. Everitt  wrote:
> On 27/11/17 18:44, Christopher Head wrote:
>> For those of us who run mostly stable systems, there is one question I don’t 
>> know a good answer to.
>>
>> If I add a specific version of a game to package.accept_keywords, I will get 
>> that version forever. That’s not really what I want: I prefer to stay up to 
>> date as new versions are packaged.
>>
>> If I add just a cat/pkg to p.a_k, Portage will always try to pull in the 
>> latest version. If that version has some unstable dependencies which I 
>> haven’t also accepted, Portage will yell at me. An example of this is 
>> games-emulation/mednafen-0.9.46 depending on dev-libs/lzo-2.10, the latter 
>> of which is unstable.
>>
>> What I really want to install is, “the latest version of the package that 
>> doesn’t pull in any deps that aren’t available (stable or accepted),” but I 
>> don’t know any way to tell Portage that. Am I missing something, or is that 
>> indeed impossible?
> Sounds to me a failure in adhering to the stabilisation criterion that
> state that all deps must be stabilised FIRST .. as the bugzilla
> stable-bot will now automagically check ...
>

Nobody is stabilizing anything.  That is the whole reason he raised
that concern.  He wants to use ~arch versions of games, with stable
dependencies.

To answer his question, there is not any way out-of-the-box to tell
portage to install the latest ~arch version of a package that has only
stable or already-accepted dependencies.  Certainly it should be
possible to build such a feature, but it doesn't exist today.

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-dev] NEWS item for games destabling

[M. J. Everitt]

On 27/11/17 18:44, Christopher Head wrote:
> For those of us who run mostly stable systems, there is one question I don’t 
> know a good answer to.
>
> If I add a specific version of a game to package.accept_keywords, I will get 
> that version forever. That’s not really what I want: I prefer to stay up to 
> date as new versions are packaged.
>
> If I add just a cat/pkg to p.a_k, Portage will always try to pull in the 
> latest version. If that version has some unstable dependencies which I 
> haven’t also accepted, Portage will yell at me. An example of this is 
> games-emulation/mednafen-0.9.46 depending on dev-libs/lzo-2.10, the latter of 
> which is unstable.
>
> What I really want to install is, “the latest version of the package that 
> doesn’t pull in any deps that aren’t available (stable or accepted),” but I 
> don’t know any way to tell Portage that. Am I missing something, or is that 
> indeed impossible?
Sounds to me a failure in adhering to the stabilisation criterion that
state that all deps must be stabilised FIRST .. as the bugzilla
stable-bot will now automagically check ...



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] NEWS item for games destabling

[Christopher Head]

For those of us who run mostly stable systems, there is one question I don’t 
know a good answer to.

If I add a specific version of a game to package.accept_keywords, I will get 
that version forever. That’s not really what I want: I prefer to stay up to 
date as new versions are packaged.

If I add just a cat/pkg to p.a_k, Portage will always try to pull in the latest 
version. If that version has some unstable dependencies which I haven’t also 
accepted, Portage will yell at me. An example of this is 
games-emulation/mednafen-0.9.46 depending on dev-libs/lzo-2.10, the latter of 
which is unstable.

What I really want to install is, “the latest version of the package that 
doesn’t pull in any deps that aren’t available (stable or accepted),” but I 
don’t know any way to tell Portage that. Am I missing something, or is that 
indeed impossible?
-- 
Christopher Head

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] NEWS item for games destabling

[Róbert Čerňanský]

On Mon, 20 Nov 2017 21:53:52 -0800
Daniel Campbell  wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 11:36:33AM +0100, Róbert Čerňanský wrote:
> > On Mon, 20 Nov 2017 10:26:29 +0100
> > David Seifert  wrote:
> >   
> > > Round 2 (with correct whitespace this time):
> > > 
> > > Title: No stable KEYWORDS for Gentoo Games
> > > Author: David Seifert 
> > > Content-Type: text/plain
> > > Posted: 2017-11-20
> > > Revision: 1
> > > News-Item-Format: 1.0
> > > Display-If-Keyword: amd64 x86
> > > 
> > > As the Games team does not have enough manpower to keep tabs on
> > > all games packages, we have dropped all ebuilds maintained by the
> > > games project to unstable KEYWORDS (without those required by
> > > other stable packages). If you have any of these stable games
> > > packages installed, you will have to add them
> > > to /etc/portage/package.accept_keywords/ manually. Failures
> > > related to missing stable KEYWORDS will show up as
> > > 
> > >   The following keyword changes are necessary to proceed:
> > >(see "package.accept_keywords" in the portage(5) man page for
> > > more details)
> > >   # required by @selected
> > >   # required by @world (argument)
> > >   =games-action/0verkill-0.16-r4 ~amd64
> > > 
> > > While we accept that this will cause some irritation for the
> > > community, pretending we have a well supported games collection by
> > > having a wealth of stable games packages is misleading at best. We
> > > welcome contributions from outsiders willing to polish up the
> > > games landscape in Gentoo via the Proxy Maintainers.  
> > 
> > What does it mean for the future?  Should not users bother to test &
> > write stabilization request bugs for games anymore?  Or stabi
> > requests will still be accepted?
> 
> If I may take a stab at this (correct me if I'm wrong, soap):
> 
> It only means games are being dropped to ~arch (testing) until other
> maintainers (proxy or otherwise) step up to make sure the games really
> are stable. Packages that rarely get attention but are still marked
> "stable" dilutes the meaning of "stable", especially if you get
> installation or runtime problems that a proper testing of the package
> would have caught.
> 
> This results in bugs that should've been caught in the testing phase,
> confuses users (and developers), and redundant or obvious bugs being
> reported.
> 
> This reads like a "fresh slate" for games, allowing them to start from
> ~arch and ensure that stabilization procedures are correctly followed
> by those who step up. While this will create more stabilization bugs,
> it should, in theory, result in better ebuilds (which makes Gentoo
> maintenance better/easier) and games that have *actually* been tested.
> 
> I hope this explanation is both accurate and helpful.

It make sense to me.  Although the original news reads more like
"games will not go to stable unless they are proxy maintained" but --
in light of your explanation -- that's probably me reading it wrong.
It is certainly better if package keywords reflect the reality.  I
only hope this will not be happening very often, more like - never
again. ;-)

...and thanks games team and everyone who provides & maintains games
in Gentoo or did so in the past.  Availability of top-class games was
one of the things which attracted me to Gentoo (lots of years ago ;-) ).
Portage being able chew original commercial CD-s blown my mind back
then.  I think this is unique to Gentoo and no other distro had ever
possibility to install those games via package manager.

Robert


-- 
Róbert Čerňanský
E-mail: ope...@tightmail.com
Jabber: h...@jabber.sk

Re: [gentoo-dev] NEWS item for games destabling

[Daniel Campbell]

On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 11:36:33AM +0100, Róbert Čerňanský wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Nov 2017 10:26:29 +0100
> David Seifert  wrote:
> 
> > Round 2 (with correct whitespace this time):
> > 
> > Title: No stable KEYWORDS for Gentoo Games
> > Author: David Seifert 
> > Content-Type: text/plain
> > Posted: 2017-11-20
> > Revision: 1
> > News-Item-Format: 1.0
> > Display-If-Keyword: amd64 x86
> > 
> > As the Games team does not have enough manpower to keep tabs on all
> > games packages, we have dropped all ebuilds maintained by the games
> > project to unstable KEYWORDS (without those required by other stable
> > packages). If you have any of these stable games packages installed,
> > you will have to add them to /etc/portage/package.accept_keywords/
> > manually. Failures related to missing stable KEYWORDS will show up as
> > 
> >   The following keyword changes are necessary to proceed:
> >(see "package.accept_keywords" in the portage(5) man page for more
> > details)
> >   # required by @selected
> >   # required by @world (argument)
> >   =games-action/0verkill-0.16-r4 ~amd64
> > 
> > While we accept that this will cause some irritation for the
> > community, pretending we have a well supported games collection by
> > having a wealth of stable games packages is misleading at best. We
> > welcome contributions from outsiders willing to polish up the games
> > landscape in Gentoo via the Proxy Maintainers.
> 
> What does it mean for the future?  Should not users bother to test &
> write stabilization request bugs for games anymore?  Or stabi
> requests will still be accepted?
> 
> Robert
> 
> 
> -- 
> Róbert Čerňanský
> E-mail: ope...@tightmail.com
> Jabber: h...@jabber.sk
> 

If I may take a stab at this (correct me if I'm wrong, soap):

It only means games are being dropped to ~arch (testing) until other
maintainers (proxy or otherwise) step up to make sure the games really
are stable. Packages that rarely get attention but are still marked
"stable" dilutes the meaning of "stable", especially if you get
installation or runtime problems that a proper testing of the package
would have caught.

This results in bugs that should've been caught in the testing phase,
confuses users (and developers), and redundant or obvious bugs being
reported.

This reads like a "fresh slate" for games, allowing them to start from
~arch and ensure that stabilization procedures are correctly followed by
those who step up. While this will create more stabilization bugs, it
should, in theory, result in better ebuilds (which makes Gentoo
maintenance better/easier) and games that have *actually* been tested.

I hope this explanation is both accurate and helpful.

~zlg
-- 
Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer, Trustee, Treasurer
OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net
fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C  1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] NEWS item for games destabling

[Róbert Čerňanský]

On Mon, 20 Nov 2017 10:26:29 +0100
David Seifert  wrote:

> Round 2 (with correct whitespace this time):
> 
> Title: No stable KEYWORDS for Gentoo Games
> Author: David Seifert 
> Content-Type: text/plain
> Posted: 2017-11-20
> Revision: 1
> News-Item-Format: 1.0
> Display-If-Keyword: amd64 x86
> 
> As the Games team does not have enough manpower to keep tabs on all
> games packages, we have dropped all ebuilds maintained by the games
> project to unstable KEYWORDS (without those required by other stable
> packages). If you have any of these stable games packages installed,
> you will have to add them to /etc/portage/package.accept_keywords/
> manually. Failures related to missing stable KEYWORDS will show up as
> 
>   The following keyword changes are necessary to proceed:
>(see "package.accept_keywords" in the portage(5) man page for more
> details)
>   # required by @selected
>   # required by @world (argument)
>   =games-action/0verkill-0.16-r4 ~amd64
> 
> While we accept that this will cause some irritation for the
> community, pretending we have a well supported games collection by
> having a wealth of stable games packages is misleading at best. We
> welcome contributions from outsiders willing to polish up the games
> landscape in Gentoo via the Proxy Maintainers.

What does it mean for the future?  Should not users bother to test &
write stabilization request bugs for games anymore?  Or stabi
requests will still be accepted?

Robert


-- 
Róbert Čerňanský
E-mail: ope...@tightmail.com
Jabber: h...@jabber.sk

Re: [gentoo-dev] NEWS item for games destabling

[David Seifert]

Round 2 (with correct whitespace this time):

Title: No stable KEYWORDS for Gentoo Games
Author: David Seifert 
Content-Type: text/plain
Posted: 2017-11-20
Revision: 1
News-Item-Format: 1.0
Display-If-Keyword: amd64 x86

As the Games team does not have enough manpower to keep tabs on all
games packages, we have dropped all ebuilds maintained by the games
project to unstable KEYWORDS (without those required by other stable
packages). If you have any of these stable games packages installed,
you will have to add them to /etc/portage/package.accept_keywords/
manually. Failures related to missing stable KEYWORDS will show up as

  The following keyword changes are necessary to proceed:
   (see "package.accept_keywords" in the portage(5) man page for more
details)
  # required by @selected
  # required by @world (argument)
  =games-action/0verkill-0.16-r4 ~amd64

While we accept that this will cause some irritation for the community,
pretending we have a well supported games collection by having a
wealth of stable games packages is misleading at best. We welcome
contributions from outsiders willing to polish up the games landscape
in Gentoo via the Proxy Maintainers.

Re: [gentoo-dev] NEWS item for games destabling

[Benda Xu]

David Seifert  writes:

> As the Games team does not have enough manpower to keep tabs on all
> games packages, we have dropped all games-* ebuilds to unstable
> KEYWORDS (modulo those required by stable non-games packages). 

"modulo" is too mathematical to be understood by a general user.

Re: [gentoo-dev] NEWS item for games destabling

[Rich Freeman]

On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 1:42 PM, Sergei Trofimovich  wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Nov 2017 15:46:02 +0100
> David Seifert  wrote:
>
>> games in Gentoo are not part of crucial Tier 1 packages.
>
> It's the first time I hear the term. How "crucial Tier 1 packages" are
> defined? Is there a link explaining/introducing the definition?
>

No.  IMO it is better to just drop that term.

Ultimately maintainers decide what gets stabilized, subject to the
general rule of 30 days in ~arch and no major bugs.  If the games team
is maintaining a package then they can decide not to have stable
keywords.

Note that not all games are necessarily maintained by the games team,
and this news item doesn't really make that clear.  Individual
maintainers are generally not bound to decisions made by the games
team, or at least that was the last council decision I recall on the
subject.

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-dev] NEWS item for games destabling

[Sergei Trofimovich]

On Sun, 19 Nov 2017 15:46:02 +0100
David Seifert  wrote:

> NEWS item for de-stabled games
> 
> Title: No stable KEYWORDS for Gentoo Games
> Author: David Seifert 
> Content-Type: text/plain
> Posted: 2017-11-19
> Revision: 1
> News-Item-Format: 1.0
> Display-If-Keyword: amd64 x86

Something very fancy going on with white-space here.

> As the Games team does not have enough manpower to keep tabs on all
> games packages, we have dropped all games-* ebuilds to unstable
> KEYWORDS (modulo those required by stable non-games packages).

Perhaps worth explicitly documenting new games@ keywording policy at
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Games

> games in Gentoo are not part of crucial Tier 1 packages.

It's the first time I hear the term. How "crucial Tier 1 packages" are
defined? Is there a link explaining/introducing the definition?

-- 

  Sergei


pgpcvYRDg12fF.pgp
Description: Цифровая подпись OpenPGP