[gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: CONFIG_CHECK_FATAL, making CONFIG_CHECKS fatal by default

[Duncan]

Fabio Erculiani posted on Sat, 26 Jan 2013 10:34:25 +0000 as excerpted:

> I am starting to think that the real problem is that Gentoo does not
> have ebuilds for building kernels (binary kernels). At that point, it
> would be easy to add USE flags and virtual packages to solve the config
> check problem at the dependencies level once and for all.

Yes, but people think the number of USE flags and testing their 
combinations on php is bad and equery u php | wc says that's only about 
80.  Try about 500 (just picking a number out of the air, maybe it's 
5000...) USE flags, and you're getting closer to kernel territory.

While in theory it could be done with less, hardcoding "reasonable" 
defaults for many options and forcing module for most drivers, it's 
unlikely that many real gentooers would be particularly happy with that, 
for the same reasons they're using gentoo in the first place.

Of course, it /would/ be possible to simply ship the gentoo kernel ebuilds 
that way, and let those who want more handle their kernel using other 
means, as I and I suppose many already do.  But doing that would force 
some seriously complex package.provided hacks for those choosing that 
route, which would effectively get us back in the same spot we're in now, 
no reliable way to check, because half the userbase would be using those 
package.provided hacks.

I've said it before and I imagine I'll say it again.  Gentoo isn't a 
handholding distro and we can't make it one.  Do the warnings and 
RESOLVED/PEBKAC or whatever if people can't read them.  People will 
either learn to read, or they'll go elsewhere, and eventually it'll no 
longer be the sort of problem it is today, due to gentoo trying to market 
a handholding service it simply cannot deliver.

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman