Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ian Stakenvicius <axs@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: USE flags in virtuals, to allow a specific provider to be determined
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 17:02:52
Message-Id: 53D6822F.6090507@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: USE flags in virtuals, to allow a specific provider to be determined by "Michał Górny"
1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
2 Hash: SHA256
3
4 On 28/07/14 07:21 AM, Micha³ Górny wrote:
5 > Dnia 2014-07-25, o godz. 14:49:44 Ian Stakenvicius <axs@g.o>
6 > napisa³(a):
7 >
8 >> Hey all.. So, putting aside for now how much of a mess this
9 >> would be to implement in the virtuals' ebuilds themselves, what
10 >> do people think of changing the virtuals so that they contain an
11 >> entry in IUSE for each provider that can satisfy it?
12 >>
13 >> The idea here is that the package satisfying a virtual could be
14 >> optionally explicitly-chosen through package.use (or USE= in
15 >> make.conf, perhaps) instead of having an entry in @world, that
16 >> way if nothing depends on the virtual then it and the provider
17 >> can be - --depclean'ed from the system. The idea is specifically
18 >> NOT to have rdeps depend on these flags, that would undermine the
19 >> whole purpose of the virtual; it would just be for end-users to
20 >> set if they so chose.
21 >
22 > I think I don't get this argument.
23 >
24 > If you really want to have a particular provider for the virtual
25 > for external purposes, it's fully purposeful to put it in @world
26 > or otherwise in a custom set. In this case, USE flags aren't
27 > helpful.
28
29 The argument I was trying to make is that USE flags would allow
30 end-users to accomplish the same thing, while not having an entry in
31 @world and therefore allowing the package to be --depclean'ed if the
32 virtual is --depcleaned.
33
34 I personally don't use sets so i've no idea if the exact same thing
35 could be accomplished in sets; for some reason i don't think so.
36
37
38 >
39 > If you only prefer a particular provider, you can tip portage
40 > easily to use it without resorting to USE flags. This also allows
41 > portage to semi-transparently switch to other provider if
42 > dependencies need it. In this case, USE flags only make this
43 > auto-switching harder.
44
45 That is the other part of this idea, to make auto-switching harder,
46 because right now portage likes to auto-switch even when it seems like
47 it shouldn't.
48
49 I figure this idea would also help with Ciaran's wishlist item of ||()
50 deps becoming more strictly-controlled and readily deterministic.
51
52
53 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
54 Version: GnuPG v2
55
56 iF4EAREIAAYFAlPWgi8ACgkQ2ugaI38ACPBfoQD/bZmCxCdLM9EyeJRrst5QmD9X
57 NS2Y0HCNhRnCfAuplUYA/2UHibYB6YHdKOi40RkWOUA0KMTRSwXYPR6dYsmByiQL
58 =njwB
59 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Replies