| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote: |
| 5 |
> Zac Medico wrote: |
| 6 |
>> Bo Ørsted Andresen wrote: |
| 7 |
>>> On Monday 29 September 2008 01:37:03 Zac Medico wrote: |
| 8 |
>>>>> Why the need for multiple solutions at all? PROPERTIES=set is too weird |
| 9 |
>>>>> and involves too much nonsensical behaviour to be useful. |
| 10 |
>>>> I don't see the PROPERTIES=set approach as being worse than any |
| 11 |
>>>> other approach for package set definition. It has lots of advantages |
| 12 |
>>>> because of the way that it fits into the existing ebuild framework |
| 13 |
>>>> like virtual ebuilds do [1], allowing it to leverage all of the |
| 14 |
>>>> existing features of the framework (including package.use) and also |
| 15 |
>>>> allowing it to leverage the tools that have been designed to work |
| 16 |
>>>> with the framework. |
| 17 |
>>>> |
| 18 |
>>>> [1] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0037.html |
| 19 |
>>> I really don't see the advantages of fitting 'into the existing ebuild |
| 20 |
>>> framework like virtual ebuilds do'. Can you name any real advantages to it? |
| 21 |
>> This idea initially came up when Jorge (jmbsvicetto) mentioned that |
| 22 |
>> he had used a package set to replace a meta-ebuild in the |
| 23 |
>> desktop-effects overlay, and then users complained that the set did |
| 24 |
>> not supporting the USE conditionals that the previous meta-ebuild |
| 25 |
>> had supported. |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> For those interested, the complaints were about this meta-ebuild |
| 28 |
> http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/desktop-effects.git;a=blob;f=x11-wm/compiz-fusion/compiz-fusion-0.7.8.ebuild;h=91783ea46143daa90f8102936e170ff43059491b;hb=master |
| 29 |
> that I replaced with the |
| 30 |
> http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/desktop-effects.git;a=blob;f=sets/compiz-fusion-complete;h=5281e30f5a4677f5f0ef882db9ff187883d569ea;hb=master |
| 31 |
> and |
| 32 |
> http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/desktop-effects.git;a=blob;f=sets/compiz-fusion;h=8a7869e77ea72f54f9bea6e1b214c124c7025934;hb=master |
| 33 |
> sets. |
| 34 |
> Optional deps on the set would allow the user to select whether to |
| 35 |
> install the gnome or kde backends and to install the unsupported plugins |
| 36 |
> or not. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
Let's be clear about what you mean by "optional". In this case I |
| 39 |
think you mean "conditional upon USE flag settings". |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
> Another alternative in this case, is to use the set operators so that I |
| 42 |
> have a single set for all packages and tell the user to create a set |
| 43 |
> with the packages he doesn't want to install from the overlay and run |
| 44 |
> emerge @compiz-fusion-@compiz-fusion-unwanted. |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
It seems to me that users will generally want something more |
| 47 |
persistent than that, in order for world updates and --depclean |
| 48 |
operations work as expected. In order to make it persistent the user |
| 49 |
could use set configuration files to subtract the unwanted atoms |
| 50 |
from @compiz-fusion, yet still be able to refer to it as |
| 51 |
@compiz-fusion and have @compiz-fusion listed in |
| 52 |
/var/lib/portage/world_sets. |
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
>> Perhaps we can support USE conditionals in sets, but this also seems |
| 55 |
>> to mean that we will need a package.use analog that applies to |
| 56 |
>> package sets. Assuming that we'll need a package.use analog, we |
| 57 |
>> might view the act of replacing meta-packages with sets as a sort of |
| 58 |
>> "throwing the baby out with the bath water" scenario in sense that |
| 59 |
>> meta-packages have lots of useful features and the only reason to |
| 60 |
>> migrate them to sets would be take advantage of the unique features |
| 61 |
>> which sets have to offer. So, rather than force a complete |
| 62 |
>> migration, we may want to consider integrating meta-packages into |
| 63 |
>> the sets framework. |
| 64 |
> |
| 65 |
> Can package.use syntax be extended to allow set entries? |
| 66 |
> @compiz-fusion -gnome kde kde4 |
| 67 |
|
| 68 |
Perhaps, but we need to clarify how that sort of setting will affect |
| 69 |
nested sets. For example, if @compiz-fusion contains nested sets, |
| 70 |
would those USE settings apply to the nested sets as well? Will |
| 71 |
nested sets be allowed to have independent USE settings from the |
| 72 |
sets that nest them? |
| 73 |
- -- |
| 74 |
Thanks, |
| 75 |
Zac |
| 76 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 77 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) |
| 78 |
|
| 79 |
iEYEARECAAYFAkjhucAACgkQ/ejvha5XGaPzJQCeKGHC4mC2hEFiVSYeP43w9oAv |
| 80 |
a9sAoJY9JWjMugzRv6GMSDzbrABmRaSV |
| 81 |
=W1wj |
| 82 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives