Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCH] Add emerge --autounmask-continue option (bug 582624)

[Alexander Berntsen]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

On 04/07/16 20:00, Zac Medico wrote:
> I wasn't aware that there was an argument about that.
I didn't argue it very heavily, but I do find it useful.

> I'll be happy to send pushed emails.
Thanks!

- -- 
Alexander
berna...@gentoo.org
https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2
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=woLN
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCH] Add emerge --autounmask-continue option (bug 582624)

[Zac Medico]

On 07/04/2016 05:17 AM, Alexander Berntsen wrote:
> Never mind. I see that it's already pushed. I guess this is where I
> continue to argue my case for "Pushed as [commit hash]" emails.

I wasn't aware that there was an argument about that. I'll be happy to
send pushed emails.
-- 
Thanks,
Zac

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCH] Add emerge --autounmask-continue option (bug 582624)

[Zac Medico]

On 07/04/2016 05:16 AM, Alexander Berntsen wrote:
> Looks OK. But you've found a few bugs already. Maybe you'll find more.
> I'd appreciate if you hold off until the end of the week before
> pushing it confidently.

I'm extremely confident in v2 of the patch. I don't expect that we'll
find any bugs in it, and even if we do find bugs, I think it's even less
likely that those bugs would affect anyone who's not using
--autounmask-continue.
-- 
Thanks,
Zac

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCH] Add emerge --autounmask-continue option (bug 582624)

[Alexander Berntsen]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

Never mind. I see that it's already pushed. I guess this is where I
continue to argue my case for "Pushed as [commit hash]" emails.
- -- 
Alexander
berna...@gentoo.org
https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2

iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJXelPSAAoJENQqWdRUGk8BMicP/i0u9q8dPi/lQAY5Y2JR5/xr
ZUNCXLhZTv8SQE/fSkkf7Cm/kgrRiLa2N0wUVSF0+npPHYfq/1Y4P5jjn/5sbgLM
AzsWfAbQjcIALt+GGnpfPlgGlOLKxX/HkCK+YN74mFsWFiTPZh6PK8tFTfNE0CMk
cRHnws1IPm5qto5opknXWQ/DkLKpuX4OtuRYXz2ZJ0gAkTJ9sNq9TvNMUpwwBozg
NdcNnHDNkYRnXdPiyAbBgO7a9QH5qvW5h7USXjPmfiVfiT97DVZYXMEQqWAw2ULf
iDYk/KhASCxPkZueFziJNaYb/YBIjuz8+jXwUUdoXylbqZ4mtvn2dr5UAzVqyXi7
YMU1CQABqvCeBy91qSSQucPK65OfX3RZXbOKa1rb6IqvxdYyGAEIJqGD+L09gfzS
PtBe/i+Dak1Je4J2QrI2G3Lm/TRF9yt065KebCOmAKcjqK/N6EFDpQ3elEZTDbRn
BODJ60OPi8IBLW+O8PcFjkU9YMSYYylKvVxToN1Q4r84trksDBj/GmMnurUozoyY
AOucJA7/ZYUeGHk4c9bCQIGmnE3ffvX+YRqOjZe309vMrF3RM3Emqn7cgWGDXp1l
mjR/HxQlIGuEkS3cXRf4vmmCOTRGJiI2jClIv4DAztbKU4E6FaAG/ymaqY0VXeJA
MgWG20fkVYt7XScYpPKL
=RKtx
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCH] Add emerge --autounmask-continue option (bug 582624)

[Brian Dolbec]

On Fri, 1 Jul 2016 22:40:47 -0700
Zac Medico  wrote:

> On 07/01/2016 03:46 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
> > On 07/01/2016 12:37 AM, Zac Medico wrote:  
> >> @@ -327,6 +341,11 @@ def action_build(settings, trees, mtimedb,
> >>display_missing_pkg_set(root_config,
> >> e.value) return 1
> >>  
> >> +  if success and mydepgraph.need_config_reload():
> >> +
> >> load_emerge_config(emerge_config=emerge_config)
> >> +  adjust_configs(emerge_config.opts,
> >> emerge_config.trees)
> >> +  settings, trees, mtimedb = emerge_config
> >> +  
> > 
> > The Package instances inside the depgraph are still going to
> > reference the old RootConfig instances, so I'll update the patch to
> > solve that somehow.  
> 
> Fixed in v2 by making load_emerge_config update existing RootConfig
> instances in-place.

looks fine to me
-- 
Brian Dolbec 

[gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCH] Add emerge --autounmask-continue option (bug 582624)

[Zac Medico]

On 07/01/2016 03:46 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 07/01/2016 12:37 AM, Zac Medico wrote:
>> @@ -327,6 +341,11 @@ def action_build(settings, trees, mtimedb,
>>  display_missing_pkg_set(root_config, e.value)
>>  return 1
>>  
>> +if success and mydepgraph.need_config_reload():
>> +load_emerge_config(emerge_config=emerge_config)
>> +adjust_configs(emerge_config.opts, emerge_config.trees)
>> +settings, trees, mtimedb = emerge_config
>> +
> 
> The Package instances inside the depgraph are still going to reference
> the old RootConfig instances, so I'll update the patch to solve that
> somehow.

Fixed in v2 by making load_emerge_config update existing RootConfig
instances in-place.
-- 
Thanks,
Zac

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCH] Add emerge --autounmask-continue option (bug 582624)

[Brian Dolbec]

On Fri, 1 Jul 2016 10:17:50 -0700
Zac Medico  wrote:

> On 07/01/2016 09:42 AM, Duncan wrote:
> > Zac Medico posted on Fri, 01 Jul 2016 08:35:26 -0700 as excerpted:
> >   
> >>> But if you genuinely think this is a good idea, and someone else
> >>> on the team does too, I won't oppose it. We should make sure that
> >>> we strongly discourage its usage for regular users. Perhaps your
> >>> suggested manpage addition already does -- I don't know.  
> >>
> >> Yeah, I think the warning message that I've put in the man patch is
> >> pretty good:
> >>  
> >>> This option is intended to be used only with great caution,
> >>> since it is possible for it to make nonsensical configuration
> >>> changes which may lead to system breakage. Therefore, it is
> >>> advisable to use ---ask together with this option.  
> > 
> > Perhaps rename the option so it makes perfectly clear the possible 
> > consequences?  Something like --autounmask-breakme, or
> > --auto-breakme ?  
> 
> My experience with my wrapper script that gives similar behavior is
> that it practically always "just works". It's fabulous for continuous
> integration (aka tinderbox) settings. However, as with self-driving
> cars, it deserves caution.
> 
> > Or alternatively, if there are other arguably dangerous options now
> > or possible in the future, put them all under another option,
> > --breakme, such that if that option isn't there, the otherwise
> > dangerous options only print a warning and die.
> > 
> > Then people can read the manpage if they really want to know what
> > it does, but people who haven't, aren't as likely to blunder into
> > it due to the stereotypical "rm -rf .*" type advice.  
> 
> It's simply not as risky as you're making it out to be. If it's a
> production system, use --ask. Honestly, people who can't be exposed to
> options like this should not have root access.

yeah, the development work I've been doing for work has me making a
bunch of new ebuilds for pkgs not yet in the tree.

This feature would make it easier for sure.

I also like the idea of this feature.

I don't think there will be many users killing their system by
overusing it or adding it to EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS.

 
-- 
Brian Dolbec 

[gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCH] Add emerge --autounmask-continue option (bug 582624)

[Zac Medico]

On 07/01/2016 12:37 AM, Zac Medico wrote:
> @@ -327,6 +341,11 @@ def action_build(settings, trees, mtimedb,
>   display_missing_pkg_set(root_config, e.value)
>   return 1
>  
> + if success and mydepgraph.need_config_reload():
> + load_emerge_config(emerge_config=emerge_config)
> + adjust_configs(emerge_config.opts, emerge_config.trees)
> + settings, trees, mtimedb = emerge_config
> +

The Package instances inside the depgraph are still going to reference
the old RootConfig instances, so I'll update the patch to solve that
somehow.
-- 
Thanks,
Zac

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCH] Add emerge --autounmask-continue option (bug 582624)

[Zac Medico]

On 07/01/2016 09:42 AM, Duncan wrote:
> Zac Medico posted on Fri, 01 Jul 2016 08:35:26 -0700 as excerpted:
> 
>>> But if you genuinely think this is a good idea, and someone else on the
>>> team does too, I won't oppose it. We should make sure that we strongly
>>> discourage its usage for regular users. Perhaps your suggested manpage
>>> addition already does -- I don't know.
>>
>> Yeah, I think the warning message that I've put in the man patch is
>> pretty good:
>>
>>> This option is intended to be used only with great caution,
>>> since it is possible for it to make nonsensical configuration changes
>>> which may lead to system breakage. Therefore, it is advisable to use
>>> ---ask together with this option.
> 
> Perhaps rename the option so it makes perfectly clear the possible 
> consequences?  Something like --autounmask-breakme, or --auto-breakme ?

My experience with my wrapper script that gives similar behavior is that
it practically always "just works". It's fabulous for continuous
integration (aka tinderbox) settings. However, as with self-driving
cars, it deserves caution.

> Or alternatively, if there are other arguably dangerous options now or 
> possible in the future, put them all under another option, --breakme, 
> such that if that option isn't there, the otherwise dangerous options 
> only print a warning and die.
> 
> Then people can read the manpage if they really want to know what it 
> does, but people who haven't, aren't as likely to blunder into it due to 
> the stereotypical "rm -rf .*" type advice.

It's simply not as risky as you're making it out to be. If it's a
production system, use --ask. Honestly, people who can't be exposed to
options like this should not have root access.
-- 
Thanks,
Zac

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCH] Add emerge --autounmask-continue option (bug 582624)

[Alexander Berntsen]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

On 01/07/16 18:42, Duncan wrote:
> Perhaps rename the option so it makes perfectly clear the possible
>  consequences?  Something like --autounmask-breakme, or
> --auto-breakme ?
No.

- -- 
Alexander
berna...@gentoo.org
https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2
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=14Rr
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

[gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCH] Add emerge --autounmask-continue option (bug 582624)

[Duncan]

Zac Medico posted on Fri, 01 Jul 2016 08:35:26 -0700 as excerpted:

>> But if you genuinely think this is a good idea, and someone else on the
>> team does too, I won't oppose it. We should make sure that we strongly
>> discourage its usage for regular users. Perhaps your suggested manpage
>> addition already does -- I don't know.
> 
> Yeah, I think the warning message that I've put in the man patch is
> pretty good:
> 
>> This option is intended to be used only with great caution,
>> since it is possible for it to make nonsensical configuration changes
>> which may lead to system breakage. Therefore, it is advisable to use
>> ---ask together with this option.

Perhaps rename the option so it makes perfectly clear the possible 
consequences?  Something like --autounmask-breakme, or --auto-breakme ?

Or alternatively, if there are other arguably dangerous options now or 
possible in the future, put them all under another option, --breakme, 
such that if that option isn't there, the otherwise dangerous options 
only print a warning and die.

Then people can read the manpage if they really want to know what it 
does, but people who haven't, aren't as likely to blunder into it due to 
the stereotypical "rm -rf .*" type advice.

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman