Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Alec Warner <antarus@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Did portage 2.1 change default use flags?
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 12:49:00
Message-Id: 44900448.6090004@gentoo.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Re: Did portage 2.1 change default use flags? by Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net>
1 Duncan wrote:
2 > Peter <pete4abw@×××××××.net> posted
3 > pan.2006.06.13.16.57.04.370327@×××××××.net, excerpted below, on Tue, 13
4 > Jun 2006 12:57:08 -0400:
5 >
6 >
7 >>On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 18:08:03 +0200, Bo Ørsted Andresen wrote:
8 >>
9 >>
10 >>>On Monday 12 June 2006 12:57, Bo Ørsted Andresen wrote:
11 >>>
12 >>>>On Monday 12 June 2006 12:42, Peter wrote:
13 >>>>
14 >>>>>All of a sudden, emerge -uD --newuse world is showing dozens of
15 >>>>>ebuild that are replaced due to removed use flags.
16 >>>>
17 >>>>Look at the first section of[:]
18 >>>>http://www.gentoo.org/news/en/gwn/20060116-newsletter.xml
19 >>>
20 >>>As far as I can see this is not mentioned in either this weeks GWN, the
21 >>>portage 2.1 release notes or the 2.1 news page [references]. I'm sure a
22 >>>lot of people running stable don't remember the GWN from January.
23 >>>Shouldn't this be mentioned somewhere now?
24
25 >>Maybe this corrected an error from prior ebuilds or portage versions.
26 >>But, from where I sit, the cure seems worse than the original problem.
27 >
28 >
29 > How so? It's making Gentoo more Gentoo-like. Taking a decision that
30 > /was/ being made and changed arbitrarily based on what was merged, by the
31 > distribution, and putting that decision back squarely in the hands of the
32 > folks who have, by making the Gentoo choice in the first place, signified
33 > that they WANT the choice of making that decision, AND the responsibility
34 > for doing so.
35 >
36 > As I've said, this absolutely should be in the release notes, and
37 > preferably should be in other coverage of the portage 2.1 changes as
38 > well. There is IMO no excuse for it not being there. However, also
39 > IMO, it shouldn't be a problem for any responsible Gentoo sysadmin, other
40 > than asking the very reasonable question of why the change isn't covered
41 > in the documentation. Other than that, it's simply doing the bog-standard
42 > coping with routine USE flag changes, only there's a few more of them to
43 > deal with than "routine" in this case.
44 >
45 This was an oversight on our part. I have added a snippet to the
46 release notes:
47
48 For the lazy.
49 * autouse (use.defaults) has been deprecated by specifying USE_ORDER in
50 make.defaults. Users may still turn this back on by specifying
51 USE_ORDER="env:pkg:conf:auto:defaults" in make.conf. Interested in
52 figuring out what use flags were turned off? Check out
53 /usr/portage/profiles/base/use.defaults and other use.defaults files
54 that correspond to your profile.
55
56 If I have some spare time I will add a FAQ question on the project page
57 as well. Once again I apologize for this. It was actually done quite
58 some time ago (January?) and no one ever added it and it was basically
59 forgotten.
60 --
61 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list

Replies