Gentoo Archives: gentoo-portage-dev

From: Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o>
To: gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o, Alec Warner <antarus@g.o>
Cc: Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] emerge: add --changed-deps-report option (bug 645780)
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2018 18:09:50
Message-Id: fe9b0e62-37f1-5c7b-5b2d-c1731d36c114@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] emerge: add --changed-deps-report option (bug 645780) by Alec Warner
1 On 01/28/2018 09:35 AM, Alec Warner wrote:
2 >
3 >
4 > On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 9:51 AM, Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o
5 > <mailto:zmedico@g.o>> wrote:
6 >
7 > The --dynamic-deps=n default causes confusion for users that are
8 > accustomed to dynamic deps, therefore add a --changed-deps-report
9 > option that is enabled by default (if --usepkgonly is not enabled).
10 >
11 > The --quiet option will suppress the report if none of the packages
12 > having changed dependencies are in the dependency graph, since they
13 > are harmless in that case. If any of these packages *are* in the
14 > dependency graph, then --quiet suppresses the big NOTE section of
15 > the report, but the HINT section is still displayed since it might
16 > help users resolve problems that are solved by --changed-deps.
17 >
18 > Example output is as follows:
19 >
20 > !!! Detected ebuild dependency change(s) without revision bump:
21 >
22 >     net-misc/openssh-7.5_p1-r3::gentoo
23 >     sys-fs/udisks-2.7.5::gentoo
24 >
25 > NOTE: For the ebuild(s) listed above, a new revision may be
26 > warranted if there
27 >       has been a dependency change with significant consequences.
28 > Refer to the
29 >       following page of the Gentoo Development Guide for examples of
30 >       circumstances that may qualify:
31 >
32 >          
33 > https://devmanual.gentoo.org/general-concepts/ebuild-revisions/
34 > <https://devmanual.gentoo.org/general-concepts/ebuild-revisions/>
35 >
36 >       If circumstances qualify, please report a bug which specifies
37 > the current
38 >       version of the ebuild listed above. Changes to ebuilds from
39 > the 'gentoo'
40 >       repository (ending with '::gentoo') can be browsed in GitWeb:
41 >
42 >           https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/
43 > <https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/>
44 >
45 >       Use Gentoo's Bugzilla to report bugs only for the 'gentoo'
46 > repository:
47 >
48 >           https://bugs.gentoo.org/
49 >
50 >       In order to suppress reports about dependency changes, add
51 >       --changed-deps-report=n to the EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS variable in
52 >       '/etc/portage/make.conf'.
53 >
54 > HINT: In order to avoid problems involving changed dependencies, use the
55 >       --changed-deps option to automatically trigger rebuilds when
56 > changed
57 >       dependencies are detected. Refer to the emerge man page for more
58 >       information about this option.
59 >
60 > Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/645780
61 >
62 >
63 > I can't really support sending this large report to users.
64 >
65 > 1) Its fairly common practice today.
66 > 2) All users will get the report.
67 > 3) A subset of them will file bugs about the report.
68 > 4) Devs make a decision about revbumping vs not; there doesn't seem to
69 > be a way for devs to say "no this change is intentional, stop nagging
70 > users."
71
72 I think in practice we need to revbump for most changes. If the changes
73 weren't worth propagating, then we wouldn't make them.
74
75 > Ultimately I'm unsure what we are trying to accomplish here. Do we think
76 > Devs are doing 4 on accident?
77
78 It doesn't matter whether it's intentional or an accident. The problem
79 is that users need to learn to react appropriately, and I think
80 --change-deps-report is probably the most efficient way to train them.
81
82 > If so, why can't we give them tools to find it ahead of time (repoman
83 > et. al.) or tools to find it post-commit (tinderbox or similar; but
84 > these are single-sourced reports.)
85
86 Sure that can be done, but it will take some work. Honestly I think the
87 devs can get it right without all that, they just need some
88 reinforcement that has been absent up until now.
89
90 Meanwhile, users need to be trained to cope with whatever comes their way.
91
92 > I also feel like we are pushing action onto users here. If we agree with
93 > the premise that this is a bug (and devs should always bump) then we
94 > don't need users to take any action;
95
96 I really do think that the devs can learn to get it right with a little
97 reinforcement.
98
99 > we could build automation that sends these 'reports'. Its not like the
100 > user is going to add anything interesting to the report. Making them do
101 > it by hand just introduces transcription errors in filing. We just need
102 > to get their permission to file the reports automatically when portage
103 > finds them.
104
105 The thing is, we let commits flow directly from git to rsync. Good luck
106 with finding volunteers to be the gatekeepers for this.
107 --
108 Thanks,
109 Zac

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies