1 |
On 19 January 2012 09:22, Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> On 01/19/2012 05:56 AM, Rich Freeman wrote: |
3 |
>> |
4 |
>> On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 12:37 AM, Duncan<1i5t5.duncan@×××.net> wrote: |
5 |
>>> |
6 |
>>> Mike Frysinger posted on Wed, 18 Jan 2012 22:00:52 -0500 as excerpted: |
7 |
>>> |
8 |
>>>> On Wednesday 18 January 2012 21:42:14 Michael Weber wrote: |
9 |
>>>>> |
10 |
>>>>> Um, what happend to the policy to not f*** around with stable ebuilds? |
11 |
>>>> |
12 |
>>>> |
13 |
>> |
14 |
>> I think there is a legitimate issue with changing dependencies on |
15 |
>> stable ebuilds. If for whatever reason a mistake is made, you just |
16 |
>> broke tons of stable systems - especially if people rebuild with -N. |
17 |
>> The idea is that stuff goes through testing before it hits stable, |
18 |
>> which is why we call it stable. If you change stable directly, then |
19 |
>> it isn't stable. :) |
20 |
> |
21 |
> |
22 |
> Care certainly needs to be taken. However, for things like eclass changes, |
23 |
> there may be no choice but to modify the metadata of all eclass consumers |
24 |
> (regardless of stable keywords). |
25 |
> |
26 |
> |
27 |
>>>> |
28 |
>>>>> I see a violation of this rule at least on [glibc-]2.13-r4, which |
29 |
>>>>> leads to useless rebuilds on `emerge -avuND world` on every single |
30 |
>>>>> gentoo install world-wide. |
31 |
>>>> |
32 |
>>>> |
33 |
>>>> i don't have too much compassion for -N. if people really care enough |
34 |
>>>> about it, they'd read the ChangeLog and see that it is meaningless. |
35 |
>> |
36 |
>> |
37 |
>> Until somebody posts a definitive list of which features we have |
38 |
>> compassion on, and which ones we don't, we should have compassion on |
39 |
>> anybody using standard portage features. It seems like when things go |
40 |
>> wrong with somebody's box the knee-jerk reaction is to say "well, you |
41 |
>> should be running daily emerge -alphabetsoup world" where alphabetsoup |
42 |
>> tends to vary by individual preference. I do recall some talk a few |
43 |
>> months ago about how it might not hurt to come up with a |
44 |
>> best-practices suggestion for doing regular upgrades, but it hasn't |
45 |
>> happened yet. I'm pretty sure -N was one of the items that was tossed |
46 |
>> around as a best practice. |
47 |
> |
48 |
> |
49 |
> |
50 |
> The fact is, the user is not being forced to rebuild anything. They can |
51 |
> simply run full system updates with --newuse less often if it puts too much |
52 |
> strain on them. It holds back progress for everyone if developers have to |
53 |
> try to avoid making changes that trigger --newuse rebuilds. |
54 |
> |
55 |
> |
56 |
>> I'm more concerned about the tendency to introduce flags in our |
57 |
>> package manager, have them get promoted in various forums, and then |
58 |
>> have people more-or-less rebuked for using them. There is no problem |
59 |
>> in having flags that shouldn't be routinely used, but man pages and |
60 |
>> such should clearly indicate when this is the case (as is the case |
61 |
>> with --unmerge and so on). If we don't warn people not to use a flag, |
62 |
>> we shouldn't punish them when they do. |
63 |
> |
64 |
> It's only perceived as punishment to a person who is compelled to run a full |
65 |
> system update with --newuse, but is unhappy with the number of packages it |
66 |
> will cause to be rebuilt. As said, they can run updates less often if it's |
67 |
> too much strain. |
68 |
|
69 |
I'd like to chime in here. I started a thread on gentoo-user (Portage |
70 |
option "--changed-use" not working?) pretty much about this. |
71 |
|
72 |
I use --changed-use instead of --newuse to get the advantages of a |
73 |
fully up-to-date system without the unnecessary churn. From the man |
74 |
page I understand that (part of) the idea behind --changed-use is to |
75 |
*not* rebuild packages where an unused/disabled USE flag is dropped. |
76 |
Which ought to apply to kdeenablefinal, right? |
77 |
|
78 |
It seems my understanding is incorrect because I see --new-use + |
79 |
--exclude is being recommended, not --changed-use. Would somebody |
80 |
please set me straight? |