| 1 |
28.2.2006, 15:00:49, Stephen P. Becker wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
>> What kind of non-interactivity? What's this universal non-interactivity |
| 4 |
>> blurb of yours and ciaranm's about? There's no such thing when it comes to |
| 5 |
>> configuration. If you want automated "configuration", then please use |
| 6 |
>> Windows and stop moaning. If you don't want to read manpages or at least |
| 7 |
>> --help, then please use Windows as well. If you want to use non-default |
| 8 |
>> setup, then you need to change default values, that's what common sense |
| 9 |
>> dictates at least. And don't use the (non)-interactivity magical formular in |
| 10 |
>> a context where it has zero sense. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
> No! You are completely missing the point. The non-interactivity of |
| 13 |
> which we speak is the idea that when you emerge some package, it is |
| 14 |
> perfectly reasonable (and in fact should be required) to expect that |
| 15 |
> package to install to your userland with no further prodding. There |
| 16 |
> should be no USE collisions which cause the emerge to die. There should |
| 17 |
> be no default configuration which will break other packages in the tree |
| 18 |
> by default. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
> Note that in no way am I talking about auto-configuration, as that would |
| 21 |
> be silly. The example problem with webapp-config which I have described |
| 22 |
> here forces a user to intervene to get packages to install to the proper |
| 23 |
> location. This is not desirable. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Selecting a webserver to use with a webapp package is a part of |
| 26 |
configuration. So again, the whole non-interactive idea is irrelevant wrt |
| 27 |
webapp-config and non-default setups. No defaults in default config won't |
| 28 |
work/won't improve anything either, since some webapps need to have their |
| 29 |
config files server-owned. Running a server and webapps is not a no-brainer |
| 30 |
which should just automagically work; to the contrary - users should think |
| 31 |
about what they are doing or they just should run a server app. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
> Basically, I really don't see why webapp-config can't have some logic |
| 34 |
> built in which makes it smart enough to figure out which webserver |
| 35 |
> somebody is using. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
Sure, you can make webapp-config depend on virtual/magic where |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
RDEPEND="|| ( app-admin/artificial-intelligence app-admin/mind-reader ) |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
and then |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
emerge lighttpd apache <a couple of servers here> <some random webapps here> |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
I think it's pretty much obvious that this just won't work since such |
| 46 |
virtual doesn't and won't exist. |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
-- |
| 50 |
Best regards, |
| 51 |
|
| 52 |
Jakub Moc |
| 53 |
mailto:jakub@g.o |
| 54 |
GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E |
| 55 |
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
... still no signature ;) |
Archives