| 1 |
On 08/12/2017 08:16 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 08/12/2017 12:22 AM, Michael Palimaka wrote: |
| 3 |
>> |
| 4 |
>>> Q. But what if I maintain firefox, and I need to change IUSE? |
| 5 |
>>> |
| 6 |
>>> If the IUSE change isn't important, just make the new revision in a |
| 7 |
>>> branch and wait to commit it later when there are more changes |
| 8 |
>>> piled up. If it is important (like if its default value changes |
| 9 |
>>> RDEPEND), then it would have required a revision anyway. |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> Please stop trying to force workflows on people. Using that same logic, |
| 12 |
>> I can make the IUSE change in-place and it would be propagated in the |
| 13 |
>> next version bump. |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> I'm not trying to force anything on anyone, I'm just asking for |
| 17 |
> feedback. If it turns out to be a stupid idea, then so be it. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> If it's understood that you can make IUSE changes but that they'll only |
| 20 |
> be propagated on the next version bump, then there would be no problem. |
| 21 |
> But we're about to document a policy that says it's OK to do things that |
| 22 |
> wouldn't normally be OK, because --changed-use is there to save us: |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> The examples of changes that can be done without a revision bump are: |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> ... |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> * adding a new USE flag or removing an existing one (since change |
| 29 |
> in USE flags is going to trigger --changed-use rebuild), |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> If developers operate under that assumption and if you don't use |
| 32 |
> --changed-use, you're going to run into problems eventually. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
--changed-use is an optional flag and portage works just as well without |
| 35 |
it. Please provide examples of such problems. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
> |
| 38 |
> |
| 39 |
>>> * emerge runs a bit faster. |
| 40 |
>> |
| 41 |
>> Why will it run faster? |
| 42 |
> |
| 43 |
> The developer now indicates that IUSE has changed, so portage doesn't |
| 44 |
> have to figure it out on its own. |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
Please provide some numbers to back up this claim. Even if we assume |
| 47 |
portage will run faster because we can remove --changed-use (which we |
| 48 |
can't, because as pointed out in other posts we still need this flag), |
| 49 |
surely any time savings gained there will be lost by pointless rebuilds? |
Archives