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

2016-07-04 Thread 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)

2016-07-04 Thread 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)

2016-07-04 Thread 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)

2016-07-04 Thread 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
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=RKtx
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

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

2016-07-02 Thread 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

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

2016-07-01 Thread 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

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

2016-07-01 Thread 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)

2016-07-01 Thread 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-