1 |
El sáb, 16-06-2012 a las 22:10 +0200, Peter Stuge escribió: |
2 |
> Pacho Ramos wrote: |
3 |
> > > I guess the point is that it is not really a dependency. |
4 |
> > |
5 |
> > No, it's a dependency only when you want ppp support working, |
6 |
> |
7 |
> Logically, but not technically. |
8 |
> |
9 |
> I like this separation; the package manager takes care of technical |
10 |
> requirements, and I get to take care of the logical requirements. |
11 |
> |
12 |
> |
13 |
> > > I dunno if a USE flag is much better? Both require the user to inform |
14 |
> > > herself in the same way ("when do I need USE=ppp for bluez" vs. "when |
15 |
> > > do I need to emerge ppp") |
16 |
> > |
17 |
> > It's much easier to widely set "ppp" USE in make.conf to be sure ppp |
18 |
> > support works for all things in my system that needing to rebuild |
19 |
> > affected package to see elog message telling me that I need to manually |
20 |
> > emerge some other package |
21 |
> |
22 |
> My point is that when you know that you need ppp (and how could you |
23 |
> set USE=ppp otherwise) then it is about equally easy to emerge ppp |
24 |
> as it is to set USE=ppp. |
25 |
|
26 |
But that point is valid with this exact example because, in this case, |
27 |
it's really intuitive to do so, but in other cases in the tree, there is |
28 |
not such good liaison between USE flag name and needed package ;) |
29 |
|
30 |
> |
31 |
> |
32 |
> > > > people end up with a lot of packages they needed to manually |
33 |
> > > > emerge some year but that they problem no longer need at all. |
34 |
> > > |
35 |
> > > Disk is pretty cheap. If the package is never being used and the user |
36 |
> > > doesn't care to remove it then the package doesn't do any harm IMO, |
37 |
> > > and as mentioned I think it's difficult for the package manager to |
38 |
> > > know what the user has installed on the system but no longer needs.. |
39 |
> > |
40 |
> > What kind of argument is "disk is pretty cheap". |
41 |
> |
42 |
> Please read the rest of what I wrote too. :) |
43 |
> |
44 |
> |
45 |
> > I still administrate a laptop with a 250GB of disk space, and that |
46 |
> > space cannot be as large if you have a lot of files at home. |
47 |
> |
48 |
> My primary system had 8GB storage until a few years ago when flash |
49 |
> prices went down. I was motivated to keep my system clean. If one is |
50 |
> space constrained then I think one naturally pays more attention to |
51 |
> keeping world small. Disk is still cheap. If it is a problem for me |
52 |
> that I have unneeded packages installed, *then* I will start looking |
53 |
> at cleaning up. Until then, there's no problem. |
54 |
> |
55 |
> |
56 |
> > Also, you are missing that having unneeded packages in world file |
57 |
> > will also cause them to be updated on every system updated, with |
58 |
> > the time it takes for compile. |
59 |
> |
60 |
> I'm not missing, but I'm saying that it is merely the effect of not |
61 |
> managing world very actively. |
62 |
> |
63 |
> I think it's difficult to impossible for a package manager to |
64 |
> reliably determine logical requirements from what is a model |
65 |
> (USE flags) of technical requirements (link-time dependencies). |
66 |
> |
67 |
> |
68 |
> //Peter |
69 |
|
70 |
Well, looks like a solution for this is already implemented in exherbo |
71 |
and there were also similar solutions proposed in the past, lets see if |
72 |
we can agree on witch one would be better for us :) |