1 |
On Fri, Dec 20, 2019 at 8:41 AM Gerion Entrup <gerion.entrup@×××××.de> wrote: |
2 |
> |
3 |
> Am Donnerstag, 19. Dezember 2019, 19:43:37 CET schrieb Sebastian Pipping: |
4 |
> > On 19.12.19 18:37, Michał Górny wrote: |
5 |
> > > We have a better alternative that lets us limit the impact on the users. |
6 |
> > > Why not use it? |
7 |
> > |
8 |
> > Which one? The CMake bootstrap copy? The adding to stage3 one? |
9 |
> |
10 |
> If an error message can be shown, maybe this is enough as a hint: |
11 |
> "expat and cmake have circular dependencies. Emerge it the first time with: |
12 |
> USE=bundled-cmake emerge -1 cmake expat |
13 |
> and then just don't care anymore about this use flag." |
14 |
> |
15 |
|
16 |
Not sure about custom error messages but in any case when using that |
17 |
bundled-cmake USE flag it would probably make sense to do an ewarn |
18 |
that the bundling took place and is only intended for temporary use, |
19 |
and that the package should be re-merged without the flag once expat |
20 |
is working. That would also cover users who inadvertently set the |
21 |
flag. |
22 |
|
23 |
I think that bundled-cmake also might make more sense than |
24 |
system-cmake, even though the latter is more established. We have a |
25 |
lot of users who set USE=-* and that means they're going to end up |
26 |
with lots of stuff bundled that doesn't need to be. I'm no fan of |
27 |
USE=-* in general but it seems like we should try to avoid making not |
28 |
setting a USE flag the less secure option since it does happen a lot. |
29 |
|
30 |
I'm just commenting on the USE-based solution. The compat package |
31 |
solution obviously bypasses this particular problem entirely. |
32 |
|
33 |
-- |
34 |
Rich |