Re: [gentoo-dev] best way to use profiles and package.use.mask?

[Friedrich Oslage]

Maybe we should ask Recruiters what most people answered to that
eom-quiz question :)

I personally think no, individual ebuild devs shouldn't touch
arch-profiles. They should simply drop the (broken) keywords and file a
keywordreq bug for those arches. Then the arch-teams can test and
eventually decide whether to keyword the package or mask the use-flag.

This way it will be documented in the package's ChangeLog which is
usually the first one I check and we won't pollute the profiles's
ChangeLog with lots of "added, removed, added, removed" entries.

Cheers,
Friedrich

Am Dienstag, den 12.08.2008, 12:00 -0600 schrieb Steve Dibb:
> Okay, this is something that I've wondered about for a while, but need
> to ask -- what is the best way (do we even have a policy) for using
> package.use.mask in profiles?
>
> A couple of specific questions:
>
> If I need to mask a use flag because of use flag dependencies that won't
> work on a particular arch, do I need to contact the arch teams to modify
> their package.use.mask profile?  If the answer is yes, I can see that as
> a huge blocker since I'd have to wait on the arches to do something
> before I can even put an ebuild in the tree.  I realize this is a
> per-arch question depending on how each one might respond, but a common
> consensus would be good.
>
> Are there ever any cases where we could just simply put the use flag as
> restricted in the global package.use.mask and then unrestrict them in
> the profiles ones if, for example, it only worked on one or a few
> arches?  Or is the best policy always to mask it on each profile?
>
> As for a specific example, mplayer's dxr2/dxr3 use flag now pulls in a
> dependency (media-video/em8300-libraries) which is only keyworded for
> x86, ppc, and amd64.  That means I'd have to mask the use flag in alpha,
> hppa, ia64, ppc64 and sparc (according to repoman).  I could skirt the
> issue completely and just run an if statement checking if they are using
> any of those three arches, but I'd prefer to do it the right way.  And
> not piss off any arch teams in the process.
>
> So I guess my question is, can individual ebuild devs freely edit
> package.use.mask files in profiles?
>
> Steve
>
>