Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Kent Fredric <kentnl@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Package file name requirement for binary ebuilds
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2016 15:19:30
Message-Id: 20161018041851.26317b78@katipo2.lan
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Package file name requirement for binary ebuilds by "William L. Thomson Jr."
1 On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 09:32:30 -0400
2 "William L. Thomson Jr." <wlt-ml@××××××.com> wrote:
3
4 > > You know you can make that argument about *every* useflag right? Being
5 > > unable to test with one and the other co-installed?
6 >
7 > Did you see the comment where portage has this function now?
8
9 I don't actually know what he's referring to specifically, so I
10 couldn't say. My best guess is something to do with "--prefix" but not
11 sure.
12
13 It could just be plain ol' slotting and eselect, but that's not "for
14 everything".
15
16 > > What are the benefits.
17 >
18 > Knowing what you are getting in seconds, made by whom.
19
20 Would you similarly want the name of the last gentoo developer who
21 touched the ebuild in the atom? No? Why not?
22
23 > > If Upstream and Gentoo both provide binary releases, but the Gentoo
24 > > one sucks, we should just abolish the Gentoo one.
25 > >
26 > > If Upstream and Gentoo both provide binary releases, but upstreams
27 > > sucks, then we should not ship the upstream version.
28 >
29 > What if you simply just do not know who made the binary?
30
31 Then the realisation that "not everyone cares" happens, and you go "ok,
32 I care, so I have to spend effort to care".
33
34 And then automatic masking strategies or emerge output decoration come
35 into play as viable solutions. As does showing the data in `eix`
36 output, etc.
37
38 Or we're going to find ourselves back debating the old "Eapi in ebuild
39 filename" debate, except worse, we'd be wanting EAPI visible in the
40 ATOM!
41
42 There's a lot of "but what if you care!??!" things, perhaps this may be
43 an important one to you, but some people care a lot about LICENSE and
44 some people just don't.
45
46 And its *really* not worth stashing that metadata in the name for a
47 minority, who *can* answer their questions.
48
49 Granted, it is just *4* characters, we're debating about here, so the
50 bikeshed is rainbow striped with sparkles.
51
52 The trick with bikesheds is everyone wants to be the person who decides
53 the colour of the shed, but are too cautious to wage in on what colour
54 we paint the house.
55
56 Because if we paint the house, "ew, we're stuck with this" if it turns
57 out gross.
58
59 But if we paint the bikeshed nasty, "eh, its just a bike shed".

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Package file name requirement for binary ebuilds "William L. Thomson Jr." <wlt-ml@××××××.com>