| 1 |
On 11/08/15 22:58, Sergey Popov wrote: |
| 2 |
> 11.08.2015 15:30, Michael Palimaka пишет: |
| 3 |
>> On 11/08/15 20:10, Sergey Popov wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> Err, i have read the whole thread and still does not get a point, why i |
| 5 |
>>> am wrong. |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>> You clearly have not. The reasoning behind Qt team's policy is described |
| 8 |
>> on the page and has been reiterated on this list. You are undermining |
| 9 |
>> what little confidence there is in the QA team by making decisions with |
| 10 |
>> no consultation about problems you do not understand. |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
>>> It's old battle like we have beforce with "gtk" meaning "any versions of |
| 13 |
>>> GTK flag". This behaviour should be killed with fire. |
| 14 |
>>> |
| 15 |
>>> Let's me reiterate some of the cases: |
| 16 |
>>> |
| 17 |
>>> 1. Package can be build without Qt GUI at all, but either Qt4 or Qt5 can |
| 18 |
>>> be chosen, but not both. |
| 19 |
>>> |
| 20 |
>>> Fix this with REQUIRED_USE, do not enable any of Qt flags by default |
| 21 |
>> |
| 22 |
>> Problem: this requires manual intervention if the user has both qt4 and |
| 23 |
>> qt5 USE flags enabled. |
| 24 |
>> |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> User choice of using USE flags is NOT a problem |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
I invite you to reproduce the problem yourself then make the judgement. |
| 29 |
Using REQUIRED_USE like this makes the affected packages unusable. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
>>> |
| 32 |
>>> 2. Package can not be build without Qt GUI - either Qt4 or Qt5 is |
| 33 |
>>> required, but not both |
| 34 |
>>> |
| 35 |
>>> Same thing here, different REQUIRED_USE operator. But - enable one of |
| 36 |
>>> the flags by default to ease life of users. |
| 37 |
>> |
| 38 |
>> Problem: this requires manual intervention if the user has both qt4 and |
| 39 |
>> qt5 USE flags enabled. |
| 40 |
> |
| 41 |
> Same here |
| 42 |
> |
| 43 |
>>> |
| 44 |
>>> 3. Package can be build with Qt4 or Qt5 or both AT THE SAME TIME(if such |
| 45 |
>>> package even exists?) |
| 46 |
>>> |
| 47 |
>>> Do not use REQUIRED_USE here, not needed. |
| 48 |
>>> |
| 49 |
>>> Now, please tell me, where am i wrong? |
| 50 |
>>> |
| 51 |
>> |
| 52 |
>> The problem is manual intervention is required if the user has both qt4 |
| 53 |
>> and qt5 USE flags enabled - and this is a common configuration. It is |
| 54 |
>> not acceptable to make a user manually add numerous package.use entries |
| 55 |
>> when all they want to do is install KDE. |
| 56 |
> |
| 57 |
> And here |
| 58 |
> |
| 59 |
>> I agree Qt's policy is not a perfect solution, but in the absence of |
| 60 |
>> some feature allowing a preference to be set when there is a conflict |
| 61 |
>> it's the best we've got. |
| 62 |
>> |
| 63 |
> |
| 64 |
> If you want to go this way, then please provide helper functions in |
| 65 |
> eclasses to set dependencies properly for all common use cases. That |
| 66 |
> will ease life both of developers and users. |
| 67 |
> |
| 68 |
> Leaving constructing of dependencies to developers in all cases will |
| 69 |
> cause only pain in your solution. |
| 70 |
> |
| 71 |
> Look at the example with berkdb/gdbm, that i have posted recently. |
| 72 |
> |
| 73 |
> If both of flags are not set - we stick to default. |
| 74 |
> Should this be set in EVERY ebuild explicitly? |
| 75 |
> |
| 76 |
> Maybe provide some sugar like $(qt_use_default qtgui 5), where |
| 77 |
> qt_use_default is the name of function, qtgui is the package and 5 is |
| 78 |
> the slot for default choice, where either BOTH of flags(qt4, qt5) are |
| 79 |
> enabled or disabled |
| 80 |
|
| 81 |
How does this solve the REQUIRED_USE problem? Or is your only objection |
| 82 |
is that resulting dependency string is "too hard"? |
| 83 |
|
| 84 |
Don't forget that as a project with no special authority, Qt's policy |
| 85 |
remains a suggestion for the vast majority of maintainers. If someone |
| 86 |
wishes to provide support for only one Qt version or abuse their users |
| 87 |
with REQUIRED_USE they are still free to do so. |
Archives