| 1 |
@4u wrote: |
| 2 |
> After posting and closing the bug report: |
| 3 |
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=135870 |
| 4 |
> Jakub Moc noticed that the current >=virtual/x11-7.0 ebuild misses its |
| 5 |
> task and creates trouble. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
Indeed. To re-iterate here, I'll basically re-paste what I've said on |
| 8 |
the bug, so that people don't have to jump to bugs.g.o.: |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
>=virtual/x11-7 is hiding breakage in ebuilds that are not ported for |
| 11 |
modular X. The side effect is that dependencies like X? ( || ( foo bar |
| 12 |
baz ) virtual/x11 ) fail once virtual/x11 gets emerged by one of those |
| 13 |
broken ebuilds, because the dependency is already satisfied by |
| 14 |
virtual/x11. If that virtual doesn't depend on either of foo bar baz, |
| 15 |
then the dependency doesn't get emerged and a perfectly valid ebuild |
| 16 |
without any missing dependencies fails. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> For example: This ebuild behaves partly like a ordinary meta build and |
| 20 |
> installs imake. You need imake (more correctly xmfmk) to install tightvnc. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Yeah, as it is now, it's essentially a dumpspace for redundant |
| 23 |
dependencies that are already stated in ebuilds fixed for modular X, but |
| 24 |
that frequently don't get installed b/c of the problem described above. |
| 25 |
We are mis-using a 'new style' virtual to produce yet another metabuild |
| 26 |
that serves the only purpose - to hide borkage. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
> For that reason I want to request the deletion of virtual/x11-7.0 and |
| 29 |
> that at least some dependencies of virtual/x11 are moved to |
| 30 |
> =>x11-base/xorg-x11-7.0 where these dependencies belong to IMHO. |
| 31 |
> xorg-x11 is a meta ebuild. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Each ebuild should state its own dependencies. x11-base/xorg-x11 is a |
| 34 |
metabuild for users' convenience, which should produce a pretty |
| 35 |
full-featured X server install, but nothing more. It's not a dumpspace |
| 36 |
for whatever redundant dependencies either. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
So - IMHO we should stop shoving the real breakage under the carpet, if |
| 39 |
ebuilds are not ported for modular X, they are broken and should be |
| 40 |
fixed. If noone cares to fix them enough for some time, they'll probably |
| 41 |
need to be package.masked and subsequently removed from the tree. Until |
| 42 |
then, they'll bomb out, because they are broken, that's a perfectly |
| 43 |
expected behaviour... |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
What we are instead doing now, is hiding the breakage by misusing |
| 46 |
virtual/x11-7 to emerge most frequently missing deps, which is bloating |
| 47 |
more and more, as more and more not broken ebuilds are hit by the |
| 48 |
redundant virtual. Not good, really. Some examples of needless borkage |
| 49 |
include: |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=123071 |
| 52 |
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=127617 |
| 53 |
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=128163 |
| 54 |
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=128353 |
| 55 |
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=128354 |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
(plus numerous duplicates). |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
While the above bugs are marked fixed, they won't be really fixed until |
| 60 |
>=virtual/x11-7 goes to /dev/null and stops causing more harm than good. |
| 61 |
|
| 62 |
Sorry for a long post, but this problem really needs to be addressed. |
| 63 |
|
| 64 |
-- |
| 65 |
Best regards, |
| 66 |
|
| 67 |
Jakub Moc |
| 68 |
mailto:jakub@g.o |
| 69 |
GPG signature: |
| 70 |
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E |
| 71 |
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E |
| 72 |
|
| 73 |
... still no signature ;) |
Archives