Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ian Stakenvicius <axs@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Addressing GLEP-62 itself
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 18:05:22
Message-Id: 5061F1F8.70904@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] [pre-GLEP] Optional runtime dependencies via runtime-switchable USE flags by Ian Stakenvicius
1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
2 Hash: SHA256
3
4 Since hasufell brought it up, and as I believe he's going to ask Council
5 to approve it before moving forward with this proposal towards including
6 it in an EAPI, I wanted to clarify some of the points mentioned:
7
8 - --- Quote, GLEP-62 ---
9 > Specifications, paragraph 3: The package manager should treat flags
10 > listed in IUSE_RUNTIME as regular USE flags, except for the
11 > following:
12 >
13 > 1. enabling or disabling any of the flags must not involve
14 > rebuilding the package,
15 >
16 > 2. it should be possible for a package manager to change those
17 > flags on a installed package without using the original ebuild,
18 >
19 > 3. when queried on a installed package, the package manager must
20 > consider a particular flag enabled only if its dependencies are
21 > satisfied already,
22 >
23 > 4. the flags may be listed in the visual output in a distinct way
24 > to inform the user that they affect runtime dependencies only.
25
26
27 #2 -- this would, if I'm understanding it properly, mean that the IUSE
28 list and the IUSE_RUNTIME list in the 'original ebuild' (ie in vdb)
29 would be ignored on an emerged package in favour of the ebuild(s) in
30 the tree, right? I'm not so sure this is a good idea.
31
32 IE, if IUSE and IUSE_RUNTIME have changed in the in-tree ebuild and
33 one of those use flags that changed have been triggered or
34 de-triggered I expect that the package should be rebuilt, to keep it
35 consistent with current practices.
36
37 IE2, shouldn't the original ebuild be what's used to trigger the
38 skip-rebuild functionality, rather than the in-tree ebuild?
39
40
41 #3 -- this seems to imply to me, that the state of a package's
42 effective USE could be modified solely on the basis of a dependency
43 existing or not and have nothing to do with what the flag was set to
44 at emerge time. IE, *not* the state of USE in the vdb. I think this
45 would also be a problem.
46
47 In order to properly handle dependency resolution (which IMO we should
48 do, because these are still USE flags) I think all use flag settings
49 should still be honoured by the PM and related metadata in the vdb be
50 updated for IUSE_RUNTIME flags identically to how it would be done if
51 IUSE_RUNTIME wasn't set.
52
53
54 Thoughts?
55 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
56 Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
57
58 iF4EAREIAAYFAlBh8fgACgkQ2ugaI38ACPAENwD/VUmHAIQxuMF8p6FHYLtPk7J+
59 Xmar9LA0pNPTme27BiEA/3mKSC4VVlUMAT8IWxBcGCFcIQAx8pfirqhx7tfc3TZl
60 =4oUH
61 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Addressing GLEP-62 itself Ian Stakenvicius <axs@g.o>
Re: [gentoo-dev] Addressing GLEP-62 itself "Michał Górny" <mgorny@g.o>