1 |
On 2/9/20 10:44 PM, Michał Górny wrote: |
2 |
> On Sun, 2020-02-09 at 22:30 -0800, Zac Medico wrote: |
3 |
>> Hi all (especially package owners in CC), |
4 |
>> |
5 |
>> In various packages we have inconsistent use of || preferences for |
6 |
>> www-client/elinks, links, lynx, w3m, and w3mmee. This means that the |
7 |
>> default preference depends on the combination of packages that one has |
8 |
>> installed and the order that one has installed them, leading to |
9 |
>> unpredictable results. |
10 |
>> |
11 |
>> Here is a list of relevant packages and their dependencies: |
12 |
>> |
13 |
>> app-text/docbook-sgml-utils: || ( www-client/lynx www-client/links |
14 |
>> www-client/elinks virtual/w3m ) |
15 |
>> app-text/sgmltools-lite: || ( www-client/w3m www-client/lynx ) |
16 |
>> app-text/xmlto: || ( virtual/w3m www-client/lynx www-client/elinks ) |
17 |
>> dev-lang/mono: || ( www-client/links www-client/lynx ) |
18 |
>> mail-client/mutt: || ( www-client/lynx www-client/w3m www-client/elinks ) |
19 |
>> mail-client/neomutt: || ( www-client/lynx www-client/w3m www-client/elinks ) |
20 |
>> net-irc/irssi: || ( www-client/lynx www-client/elinks ) |
21 |
>> sys-fs/gt5: || ( www-client/links www-client/elinks www-client/lynx ) |
22 |
>> x11-base/xorg-server: || ( www-client/links www-client/lynx www-client/w3m ) |
23 |
>> |
24 |
>> How about if we create some more virtuals to cover all of the relevant |
25 |
>> cases? |
26 |
> |
27 |
> I don't think that's a valid case for a virtual since those tools do not |
28 |
> provide a consistent API for other packages. It just happens that some |
29 |
> packages explicitly support multiple choices, and this is exactly what |
30 |
> || indicates. |
31 |
> |
32 |
> The virtuals would really be arbitrary here. Developers would |
33 |
> repeatedly fail to use them because they wouldn't naturally expect |
34 |
> the virtual to exist. |
35 |
|
36 |
In that case, I suppose we'll have to apply consistency manually? Can we |
37 |
all agree on a global order of preference for the relevant packages? |
38 |
-- |
39 |
Thanks, |
40 |
Zac |