Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCH] Add emerge --autounmask-continue option (bug 582624)
-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 iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJXeqmjAAoJENQqWdRUGk8BIgcQAKAB/lfkDzV8CHGi1ON9eHMI kcLyTwryvX7Px/WM3Hz/lHcyVqQY10KxbRKxHW9yc1D1InyaVKeBilnL55eCdzUv BkXwWrXeQCu390FXy4ph7nrQYm15fEqhW/kAD0BWYY2Bryks9UEPXFnNK/Aq0OTl JVLGiWvc3ys9m1KJQ9PYdC+KgpXHMPl9bW0ui55063JmOTJZVjys713cCuRMCjiv TLBk8fL266C1XZxkyomiYXVozE0y2ON9mDvqHpd2vUVuk64t4Ej3SwWvruX46rrw XJZBu2HyUYYsaCnfl2xf97B1vai/r9XWae7kuzOZmrDvZzg0kVMxgwiXZtSAEXM7 ETlTRMjXZZl6e/gZ145rl8a8GSe/ElvLJGZOk+RdB9R8DzBmbGRyT53XQHZgkSgt IvP+g4fYkutovyKQW8rVBiC4FCol3glugYHf6213e6ltWFRsIp+D9aWiynjG7gmD esFTggYQexoTACpRgEjDBfbLkqd+Uv9CqGpYDvzX5zz626oxZ+ml9n8TtUTiHH5y 4XKWBWJykZZnLpfLPB9aofVU9u+0mA/S6028SfvuOpVjHi3bXRAl9i9W2AMoQsDU 1OcUJAfiVYOQRbLNg9iVoIVyjpz51Dr5rUb9UNP+Cci8OiJ4Dnu3/sEEgVIv9F+n 2soIC8Gapk3mqx5Wq5v2 =woLN -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCH] Add emerge --autounmask-continue option (bug 582624)
On 07/02/2016 12:31 PM, Brian Dolbec wrote: > 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 Thanks, pushed: https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/portage.git/commit/?id=e2d88ef3ff5958571ef2da5f69e8756522390f0f -- Thanks, Zac
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCH] Add emerge --autounmask-continue option (bug 582624)
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)
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)
-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)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 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. - -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJXelOEAAoJENQqWdRUGk8BaZkP+gLy+ED4yZesGFZma0p8zpLA X/xbqCiA3EVeAMa+0wS1KfwKFJuj9DpvUDkz3tx/G+Vgw6PMEkIUpGxkO2wL2o1R B4RlSmlRy0XNcJA03Iig01arnsSmcdl4enr8A7ltSEM2RbrI+gLifIoRxBUDxsoW +Zp0ovSm6DrSsC4KZO7reZ5GFmNqi63xQqFHru2FsLxipCpD/BN0QKCnldDKi/A8 vNNtKRw9s77K0atCeqAxJYG+WTn4hpV8Ro2BTXjqwzCrllPksfY5ouKjAP0wMLV7 doQ3z2kc25ZgYRsLh/MJVledH6QtbxHFs4hqaW+EloGR5nQYK6sXi30bfU5AaW8V 3pPh4H1MD8AJ9rl13azf79D4GmOpNyn1eV7GNAfe1W24YrhwHvbwEmCjRhkb1Yzh VV4HL6EgqkhjXHBY0A+HqLvjmvnFyjDmRiEX4O8JmFWpuENq0KGwzTQHAZkyF/MB LvOAcr2txVtPy2ZK25lwcz9CK6nlFtmERNhPIkrTpDTKxsxc787embvvTPjdMkve wNuUQhHYVtWixLLef0xaGMArq/aLcDWVfsTzxLxqfFwa0xReaP5UNO7Uabgf43oe BvVewtN0oByOipAQ5Eo78p5ueB7CQqJhakudqwM3DC4GWHMweo9aPGsnmgk8reog zz7RZFeNjPEFNxDGZ06G =Kl8X -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCH] Add emerge --autounmask-continue option (bug 582624)
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
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCH] Add emerge --autounmask-continue option (bug 582624)
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
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCH] Add emerge --autounmask-continue option (bug 582624)
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)
-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 iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJXdp2pAAoJENQqWdRUGk8BBBYQAMGox5DztriYSWDvnFJQ4gWv rAYmauL+hb4fvv7NTRjrPzqh4YBKj/pRsaNavAnfBQxqPSmYYZ34exR7vpW3Felb /gKxKWG1tRwjqC9mZzMjY9Xv/0cD5lprJ4CPXEV32PuP1Y48FBr382aS0X0PIeKr 9cX81Rgt50eS7X7ccJ8GJq6TC8FowCVmOgILrDsKLDeSEVWA4whL0etsBv9ipLC4 4Qg0EfJ1ff9y3e3bMpQ/QbjBRzt6nNyJhw6KlxbhUE4X3wgLP4UUjc/vcRtM9k/o nTbG1JPzLLV3vJcEGwWbdM746wZpntslgv15Rp+fsw71grPV5AVFcBsPpfsXbUdc 2t37JB0PZp2MgzTV8JGaF7C7WppE1MJ70ZioAAF7RdoGV0BhGLUt3f9uCwjd37nH nIescYraZCOk96zEC7hDzVyBBL8Z8nVAnwHorKxDcoFzS02dlcnrIqBUhQrkr+rD pg+oPgLzU++nTjYgd8dn4j+h7hRAWIOFUaMPTmwI6Zi4hqtij56GnJZRrO5kMq+8 zmSyixEAJjJQucvw+wns2YPbI/ek/LPez6GJHN2sk3APNPcWISXdYmV4UxdhK2t9 UDIM8OQxKcyjM9+vErr5BU9Dy+OuQtpjGwtkcanEXRwVDh+QCci4MwGuH2hDDpRZ 6YOj9c0nsVwQd3bSnEB5 =14Rr -END PGP SIGNATURE-
