1 |
Patrick Lauer wrote: |
2 |
> Hi there, |
3 |
> |
4 |
> a while ago Thilo Bangert spent quite some time on filing lots of bugs. While |
5 |
> I appreciate such QA efforts I don't agree with those bugs at all. |
6 |
> |
7 |
> All of these bugs were for the use of the FEATURES variable in ebuilds, which |
8 |
> is a very convenient thing to work around issues. |
9 |
> For example known failures with FEATURE="distcc" or funky things like test |
10 |
> failures with FEATURES="userpriv" and so on. All other methods of expressing |
11 |
> that are much more verbose and inherently sucky. |
12 |
|
13 |
What other methods are there? |
14 |
|
15 |
|
16 |
> One example of such a bug is https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=278960 |
17 |
> for those too lazy to search. |
18 |
|
19 |
For that very case I remember that "test" is a global use flag as well |
20 |
and that therefore at least |
21 |
|
22 |
if hasq test ${FEATURES} ; then |
23 |
[..] |
24 |
fi |
25 |
|
26 |
has a cleaner use-flag-based equivalent. |
27 |
|
28 |
# euse -i test |
29 |
global use flags (searching: test) |
30 |
************************************************************ |
31 |
[- ] test - Workaround to pull in packages needed to run with |
32 |
FEATURES=test. Portage-2.1.2 handles this internally, |
33 |
so don't set it in make.conf/package.use anymore |
34 |
|
35 |
|
36 |
> To quote: |
37 |
> "FEATURES is a portage specific package manager configuration variable not |
38 |
> specified in PMS and cannot reliably be used in ebuilds or eclasses." |
39 |
|
40 |
Makes sense to me atm. |
41 |
|
42 |
|
43 |
> Well then, I suggest we finally start documenting reality and fix PMS. The use |
44 |
> of the FEATURES variable, while it has been there for ... uhm ... as long as I |
45 |
> can think back, actually :), should not be randomly suppressed. |
46 |
> |
47 |
> So ... what's your opinion? Should we do things as they are correct, or as |
48 |
> they are specified in PMS? ( /me points at bash 3.0 ) |
49 |
|
50 |
My opinion is: please stop dissing PMS, it doesn't help anybody. |
51 |
I have requested that from you before. |
52 |
|
53 |
Would a patch for the next EAPI theoretically impossible? |
54 |
|
55 |
|
56 |
|
57 |
Sebastian |