Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Plausible idea for GLEP 19?
On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 13:02:37 -0600 Mikey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | On Sunday 22 January 2006 13:02, Marius Mauch wrote: | Well, posting YAIP (yet another implementation plan) won't really | help either. | | Correct, plans never seem to go anywhere in regards to this... Because no-one has yet come up with a viable plan... -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (King of all Londinium) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] r2522 commit
On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 21:33:07 -0500 Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Sadly this breaks something else we apparently need and use ( or at | least Ciaran tells me so :) ) Yeah, based upon my understanding of how flag? stuff inside || () is supposed to work: || ( ) - nothing needed || ( off1? ( blah1 ) off2? ( blah2 ) blah3 ) - blah3 || ( off1? ( blah1 ) off2? ( blah2 ) ) - nothing needed || ( ( off1? ( blah1 ) ) blah2 ) - nothing needed Meaning: for every direct child of a || () block: if it's a USE flag block that isn't met, remove it. It's pretty silly really, but designed that way. Anyone actually using this feature will have to use both use *and* has_version when writing their econf / whatever call. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (King of all Londinium) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] ACCEPT_KEYWORDS depreciation
On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 00:35:07 -0500 Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | I've been trying to sit in #gentoo more often ( I figured insanity | would be a good excuse for my crummy grades ) and I am scared by the | fact that people still walk in and try using ACCEPT_KEYWORDS=~blar | to emerge things. We all know why this is bad, and it's been bad for | quite some time. | | Opinions on adding a warning when users have set this in their | environment? If you're warning on that, you could also warn on far more dangerous and at least equally as common things like silly CFLAGS or having LDFLAGS set. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (I can kill you with my brain) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] .53, .54 and beyond...
[ Apologies if two of these show up. I kinda, uh, broke Exim slightly... ] On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 16:41:19 -0500 Ned Ludd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | On Fri, 2005-11-25 at 21:00 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | How will that work for packages that have a runtime dependency upon | a text file supplied by a different package? | | text files which are true runtime deps belong in RDEPEND. So an embedded system creating tool thing will end up providing broken installs when ignoring RDEPEND? | Clearly c++ templates are beyond the scope of the what RRDEPEND can | provide. I could be wrong but I don't think those c++ templates are | anything revdep-rebuild or verify-rdepends handle any differently. Separate issue. I was thinking more along the lines of (non-minimal) vim needing vim-core, for example. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Supreme Lord Gerbil Wrangler) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] .53, .54 and beyond...
On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 17:49:50 -0500 Ned Ludd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Yeah that's what we want, We intend to create tools that leave systems | broken. You want to be the first tester? Please take your spin of | things off of this and look at it for what it is. Your not going to | use a feature for something unless it's suited for the job at hand. So why not create a better feature? -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Supreme Lord Gerbil Wrangler) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] .53, .54 and beyond...
On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 19:00:07 -0500 Ned Ludd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Why introduce a feature which is crippled? It would be almost as | easy to allow ebuilds to mess with their 'real' runtime dependency | value as appropriate rather than forcing an incorrect | auto-generated list onto everyone. | | Please go back to trolling on dev We are trying to get work done here | and solve real problems. Sure. You're inventing some arbitrary problem which has no reflection upon reality and then solving some other arbitrary problem which has no reflection upon either reality or what you say you're solving. End result is more unnecessary complexity, more unnecessary mess and, once you realise your solution is inadequate, no doubt yet another incomplete hack on top of that. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Supreme Lord Gerbil Wrangler) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] .53, .54 and beyond...
On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 19:42:14 -0500 Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 19:00:07 -0500 Ned Ludd [EMAIL PROTECTED] | wrote: | | Why introduce a feature which is crippled? It would be almost as | | easy to allow ebuilds to mess with their 'real' runtime | | dependency value as appropriate rather than forcing an incorrect | | auto-generated list onto everyone. | | Talking on solar about this confirmed my suspicions, the ELF data | can't be wrong, otherwise things won't link properly. Thus if we were | just to use ELF NEEDED entries, how could the list of reverse runtime | deps be incorrect as you imply above? It can be incomplete. Of course, finding the ELF NEEDED entries is not a sufficient solution to the initial problem, nor is it a sufficient solution to the real problem here. | So in regards to reverse dependency tracking, do you have a | solution/advice or just useless criticism? Please attempt to be | constructive here. Sure. My advice is to scrap the current idea and redo it to take into account things which are not just ELF-related. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (The one that looks before leaping) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] emerge -pv and masked dependencies
On Fri, 4 Nov 2005 11:19:51 -0800 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | I swear you have got to be just about the most negative pessimistic | whining poster on this list. Yeah, he's like those silly scientist guys who go around asking pesky questions when someone proposes that an anti-nuclear-missile shield is built. Clearly un-American. Instead, he should jump right in and implement it without bothering to think of the requirements or exactly what the problem to be solved is. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Anti-XML, anti-newbie conspiracy) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm pgpyXUrSMQVVr.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Questions about CVS locations and GID...
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 21:39:49 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | So bluntly, shut up and let those who you think are being retarded, | be retarded. Discussions on this list regarding those attempts | shouldn't be heckled unless you're contributing to those efforts (and | I truly mean *contributing*, not trying to punch holes in embryonic | efforts that are trying to get off the ground addressing the major | issues up front). Pfff. By contributing to the design by showing what *won't* work, I'm saving a heck of a lot of wasted man hours that will otherwise be spent writing a non-working solution. A contribution of code is worthless if the code is completely wrong, no matter how much effort was spent producing it. But then, we all know how this goes. When the code's 'done', it gets merged, and then you start claiming If you had any issues with it you should have brought them up at the design stage. It's too late now!. So really, it's a no win situation. Point out gaping design flaws at the start and you're accused of shooting holes in things that don't exist yet. Point out gaping design flaws when it's first merged and you're accused of shooting holes in things upon which people have spent lots of time. Point out gaping design flaws after it goes live and you're told it's too late. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm pgp0oXvLP1axK.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Questions about CVS locations and GID...
On Thu, 6 Oct 2005 13:42:55 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | What's stated above, and what this thread has come down to is that | you're putting a lot of reqs and pointing at whatever roadblock you | can for anyone who attempts it. Kudos, although bluntly, talk is | cheap. Bah. Not roadblocks, basic design requirements. | Produce a patch and maybe people will listen to you, otherwise those | of us who are tired of listening to others state how it should be | done (but do nothing but talk), are going to jump in and do it, | addressing the issues thus pointed out. Unlike some, I don't pretend to know enough about the design part of this to even consider working on a patch. Code that does the wrong thing is at best worthless. | In other words, their really is no point in debating people | attempting it. They're going too, and as I made pretty bluntly clear, | the only say you've got on this is as a member of the dev community | when/if they push for it to go mainline. ...at which point, you will claim the work is already done, so it's too late to block this now. | If people are up for the continuing pissing match, take it private. I'm not hearing what I want to hear, so I will repeatedly throw out lots of ad hominem attacks and wild accusations rather than address the issues at hand. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm pgpdvxGwcbXrq.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Questions about CVS locations and GID...
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 11:35:18 -0700 m h [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | I'm working on trying to get prefixed installs working. You might want to start with a proper (not content-free like the last two attempts) requirements spec and design before you jump in with the code. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm pgpkrE2gJ3tDk.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Questions about CVS locations and GID...
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 15:24:29 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | To head off the it's not going to work for vim-*, yah, you'll be | boned and have to install duplicate vim-* into the global prefix. | Bluntly, either you dive in and start wading through the problems | (fixing them as you go), or you sit back listening to how it's never | going to work (thus accomplishing nothing). It can be made to work, so long as you don't a) jump in without proper planning, b) assume that you'll not have to modify ebuilds and c) demand that as soon as it's available, it works for all ebuilds. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm pgpDq8Dkk8Yjv.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Questions about CVS locations and GID...
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 16:16:06 -0500 Kito [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | b) assume that you'll not have to modify ebuilds | | I don't think anyone(devs) has made this naive assumption have they? pvdabeel has for pathspec. | and c) | demand that as soon as it's available, it works for all ebuilds. | | I don't think anyone(devs) has made this naive demand have they? pvdabeel has for pathspec. | ICANINSTALLTO was the best idea presented, but that implies it would | be a list of known working prefixes, which seems unrealistic. Maybe | it would be better to have portage error check that globally at the | load_config stage against a list of known stupid prefixes, | stupidprefixes=[/usr,/,/bin] etc. etc. The plan was to have ICANINSTALLTO=root home prefixed or somesuch. The name isn't particularly clear on that... -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm pgp6Nbtw6j315.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Questions about CVS locations and GID...
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 16:13:06 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | A) would like to hear what you think is required planning wise | compared to the previous haubi prototype patch. There has been no serious discussion on how *ebuilds* will use the prefix system. Hacking econf and expecting PREFIX to be sufficient is naive from a tree-perspective. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm pgprvYY2wTOts.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Questions about CVS locations and GID...
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 18:00:12 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Beyond that, there is the shebang issue which can be addresses via a | combination of automated scans/fixes, and fixing bugs as it's hit. | Hardcoded vars in scripts for the path to a binary are an issue also, | although again, scans can be done to at least check for it. This one's a far bigger issue than might be initially obvious. It would involve rewriting a whole load of autotools innards... | Leaves mangling the build process so that the build framework of the | package uses the prefix offset files, rather then / . For c/c++ | source, usual trick from fink afaik involves a mangling of cflags | with -I tacked in. Kinda ugly, although I'd expect there is a better | route. Again, autoconf tinkering. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm pgpnQhicXqEDx.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Questions about CVS locations and GID...
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 18:40:46 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | It does in some places, it doesn't in others. It especially doesn't | for things that aren't normally found via PATH. It's a hell of a | mess. | | Examples? Of stuff in PATH? /bin/sh is assumed throughout to be a Bourne compatible shell (and SHELL and CONFIG_SHELL aren't universally honoured). uname, hostname and sed are called with hard paths (with various fallbacks) in several early on stages. Of stuff not in path? There's no standard and widely used way of digging up where libexec tools are. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm pgpaizwnjub0S.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Questions about CVS locations and GID...
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 20:01:34 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | What's being raised here is issues with making ebuilds handle prefix | _perfectly_. Where are the portage issues, so that people can | actually jump in and start testing out actual solutions, rather then | conjecturing about what may or may not break? The issue is that you need to fix autoconf before you can claim that any non-trivial test case works correctly. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm pgpuwdeoxEWcC.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Questions about CVS locations and GID...
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 20:17:40 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | The issue is that you need to fix autoconf before you can claim that | any non-trivial test case works correctly. | | And how are you going to verify autoconf works perfectly without | testing it? Can't. Dead easy to verify that it will break without testing it, though. Just look at the source. | The point I'm making is that the only thing required of *portage*, is | the prefix var being used internally, and handed down to the ebuilds. | | Ironing out the ebuild cruft is left to those who want it. Again, | where is the hold up for *portage*? That's rather short-sighted... Portage is irrelevant without the ebuilds. | What's the problem? Why the 101 holes before they even can attempt | it? If you're after shooting the idea down (as I suspect), state so | rather then death by a thousand cuts. Saves us time, really. | | Hell, haubi's patch already lays the ground work for testing it. I'm | not seeing why you're being negative about people even working on it. Because a botched solution is worse than no solution at all. You've seen the mess we end up with when people start working with a half-arsed initial setup. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm pgpEgTt9aTo0S.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Questions about CVS locations and GID...
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 20:32:20 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | That's rather short-sighted... Portage is irrelevant without the | ebuilds. | | And ebuilds are irrelevant without portage. Point? Portage is considerably less work than the tree. Saving as much effort as possible from an ebuild perspective should be a major consideration, even if it makes the portage side more complicated. Think of how all the ebuild-related problems are going to be solved first. Don't leave it as an afterthought. | My point experimentation can start for addressing the issues you keep | pointing at still stands. The sensible place to start experimenting is by adapting existing ebuilds and tinkering with ebuild.sh, not by adding something which may or may not end up being relevant to portage proper. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm pgpnbNAjoxpwk.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Questions about CVS locations and GID...
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 20:48:26 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | The sensible place to start experimenting is by adapting existing | ebuilds and tinkering with ebuild.sh, not by adding something which | may or may not end up being relevant to portage proper. | | Bluntly, what the hell do you think we're talking about here? In | case you haven't caught on, there *are* portage modifications that | have to go with it, meaning more then ebuild.sh. And you don't have a clue what said modifications really are until after you solve the ebuild side of things. The correct way to solve the problem is as follows: 1. Properly define what you are trying to solve from an end result perspective. 2. Properly define and provide substantial examples of how this can be done sanely through ebuilds. 3. Work out how this applies to portage. 4. Make sensible small revisions to 2. and 1. as necessary based upon any problems encountered in 3. The wrong way is as follows: 1. Jump in with some portage code which does something random. 2. Come up with a badly thought out incomplete requirements list. 3. Start hacking ebuilds into an even worse mess to accommodate earlier screwups. And for the sake of completeness, the other wrong way which isn't being taken this time is: 1. Come up with some buzzwords. 2. ??? 3. Profit! | Regardless, I'll backport haubi's patch to stable if anyone is after | screwing with it, unless michael's has a version that applies cleanly | to .53_rc4. Enough dancing, would rather hand it off to those who | are interested, and see what they come up with rather then fencing | via email (and accomplishing nothing). *sniff* *sniff* Ah yes, the familiar smell of multilib, osx, genkernel and the original portage implementation. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm pgpSjJb9MkVhc.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Questions about CVS locations and GID...
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 20:56:42 -0500 Kito [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Its not like this is unchartered territory... off the top o' | me head pkgsrc, DarwinPorts, openpkg, fink, written word, | autopackage, MINE, and SamHain have all tackled this in one way or | the other. All of these projects have their faults (duh? but then | again so does portage and the ebuild tree) but a few of them have | been quite successful despite their varying points of inherent | silliness. Sure. They work around it by having lots and lots of workaround code, not by solving the original problem. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm pgpbIJpgq1dzl.pgp Description: PGP signature
