1 |
On Wed, 12 Dec 2012 12:53:01 +0100 |
2 |
Francesco Turco <fturco@××××××××.fm> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> Hello. |
5 |
> |
6 |
> A couple of weeks ago I filed a bug because in the Installation |
7 |
> Handbook I found some references of the "world" set in emerge |
8 |
> commands, as opposed to "@world": |
9 |
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=445184 |
10 |
> |
11 |
> The bug was closed as invalid, and I was told that: |
12 |
> |
13 |
> > sets with the @ prefix are a portage-2.2 feature, which is still |
14 |
> > hardmasked and thus not documented. |
15 |
> |
16 |
> The fact is that I have portage-2.1.11.37, not 2.2, and man emerge |
17 |
> says: |
18 |
> |
19 |
> > When used as arguments to emerge sets have to be prefixed with @ |
20 |
> > to be recognized. |
21 |
> |
22 |
> One possibility is that documentation stick with the stable portage |
23 |
> package, not the testing one (I have a ~amd64 system only). But I |
24 |
> checked portage 2.1.11.31 (the latest stable amd64 portage package |
25 |
> version) and the previous phrase is there, too. |
26 |
> |
27 |
> I know it's not a very important issue, but I'd still like to know if |
28 |
> I'm wrong or not, and why. |
29 |
|
30 |
You are wrong, the docs and the man pages are correct. |
31 |
|
32 |
The problem is that the word "set" is used in two different ways, one |
33 |
loosely and the other with reference to an exact construct. |
34 |
|
35 |
portage-2.2 introduced the concept of "a defined set" under user |
36 |
control. It's a list of packages that portage treats as a whole chunk |
37 |
of things together and the user can define what he wants in a set and |
38 |
give it a name. When used with emerge, sets like this must have an "@" |
39 |
prefix so portage can tell them apart from regular packages. Portage |
40 |
also dynamically creates sets internally that work the same way, things |
41 |
like @world and @system and @preserved-rebuild. You can use these too, |
42 |
you just can't define them or modify them directly. |
43 |
|
44 |
The portage man page has unfortunately also used the word "set" for a |
45 |
different reason. Portage has always had a concept of "world" (not |
46 |
@world) and "system" (not @system) which were really "just a bunch of |
47 |
stuff that happens to pop out of portage because it's hard-coded that |
48 |
way". And the docs say things like |
49 |
|
50 |
emerge world |
51 |
|
52 |
and call the "world" part "the world set". |
53 |
|
54 |
"Set" here is a homonym - two completely different words with different |
55 |
meanings that just happen to be spelled and sound the same. |
56 |
|
57 |
English too has the identical problem - the word "set" holds the |
58 |
undisputed record for the English word with the most definitions - it |
59 |
had 134 last time I checked. That's right, 134 meanings for 3 letters |
60 |
as verified by that big Oxford dictionary that you need a wheel barrow |
61 |
to carry it around in (and a big magnifying glass to read). It's not |
62 |
surprising some of that leaked into Portage :-) |
63 |
|
64 |
The docs you mention are using the second, loose, definition of the |
65 |
word. |
66 |
I recommend you treat it as simply a problem of over-loaded human |
67 |
languages and just deal with it |
68 |
|
69 |
:-) |
70 |
|
71 |
-- |
72 |
Alan McKinnon |
73 |
alan.mckinnon@×××××.com |