Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Brandon Hale <tseng@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Interaction in ebuilds - bad idea?
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2004 22:34:18
Message-Id: 1083364536.17832.4.camel@y0shi
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Interaction in ebuilds - bad idea? by Stuart Herbert
1 On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 23:28 +0100, Stuart Herbert wrote:
2 > On Friday 30 April 2004 22:53, Marius Mauch wrote:
3 > > I don't like that idea, portage shouldn't be interactive by default.
4 >
5 > Hrm. It would only have to be interactive the first time - when it has
6 > questions that it doesn't have answers to. And it asks all of those
7 > questions up-front - when it has the user's attention.
8 >
9 > It's no different in principle to the way that a windows-based installer asks
10 > you all the questions before installing your files. It's a
11 > human-computer-interaction model that most people understand, and are
12 > comfortable with.
13
14 Debian already does what you are talking about, with gtk and ncurses
15 frontends being optional. Questions have priority, you can set what
16 questions you want to see and which to allow defaults on, eg ask
17 questions with greater than medium importance. It's also possible to
18 re-run the questionnaires per package. This is how they configure XFree
19 drivers + modelines, ask permission to setuid on certain bins, etc. I
20 don't necessarily support this idea, just giving a possible source of
21 inspiration (or even what not to do, as the case may be).
22
23 > > Use pkg_setup()
24 >
25 > ... and output a message that the user probably won't read, because it appears
26 > two hours into an 'emerge -u world' and has long gone from the terminal's
27 > screen buffer by the time the user returns.
28 >
29 > I think asking the user *before* the emerge -u world begins is a lot
30 > friendlier myself.
31 >
32 > > and tell the user to set the required values via the
33 > > environment or with a tool, let's call it gentoo-db-config for now.
34 >
35 > Sounds like the 'cache editor' that I mentioned in my original post.
36 >
37 > > That's the standard way to do such things (java-config, gcc-config) and
38 > > I don't see why databases should be an exception.
39 >
40 > These tools don't influence ebuilds at all.
41 >
42 > Although it might benefit working with databases, my idea about improving
43 > Portage is a more general idea.
44 >
45 > Best regards,
46 > Stu
47 > --
48 > Stuart Herbert stuart@g.o
49 > Gentoo Developer http://www.gentoo.org/
50 > Missed the php|cruise? http://dev.gentoo.org/~stuart/cruise-2004/
51 >
52 > GnuPG key id# F9AFC57C available from http://pgp.mit.edu
53 > Key fingerprint = 31FB 50D4 1F88 E227 F319 C549 0C2F 80BA F9AF C57C
54 > --

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Interaction in ebuilds - bad idea? Wazow <wazow@××××××.pl>