| 1 |
On 12/07/17 15:36, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 15:19:32 +1000 |
| 3 |
> "Sam Jorna (wraeth)" <wraeth@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> On 12/07/17 15:14, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: |
| 6 |
>>> Is it in system? |
| 7 |
>>> Is it in a set? |
| 8 |
>>> Is it in world? |
| 9 |
>>> If no to all, its a dep, warn! |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> All this says is whether the package was explicitly installed and |
| 12 |
>> recorded in world, or is a member of @system. The target package may |
| 13 |
>> or may not be a dependency, may or may not have been --oneshot'd. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Then when the user sees the warning they can discard knowing they |
| 16 |
> merged the package with --oneshot. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
I have trouble remembering what I ate for dinner last night, let alone |
| 19 |
what I may or may not have merged a week, month or year ago, or what |
| 20 |
options I used when merging it. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> What harm does a warning do? |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Depends on the user, which can't really be avoided, but means that |
| 25 |
warnings should be clear and meaningful, otherwise they become |
| 26 |
background noise. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
>> It may have been installed as a dependency but the requiring package |
| 29 |
>> was removed, |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> Then the person failed to run --depclean and maintain their system. |
| 32 |
> Either way, did the person install the package directly? |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
> If the package was not installed by the user. Should they not be warned |
| 35 |
> about removing something they did not install? |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
Such as: |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
emerge --unmerge dev-python/keyring |
| 40 |
* This action can remove important packages! In order to be safer, use |
| 41 |
* `emerge -pv --depclean <atom>` to check for reverse dependencies before |
| 42 |
* removing packages. |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
>> or may have been installed as an orphan but is now a |
| 45 |
>> dependency. |
| 46 |
> |
| 47 |
> Now being a dependency the warning would be valid. |
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
"Sometimes being accurate" is not the most noble of goals. |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
>> Assuming that if it's not in a set it must be a dependency is |
| 52 |
>> incorrect and misleading. |
| 53 |
> |
| 54 |
> Again there are various ways. There cannot be that much overhead to |
| 55 |
> check if a single package depends on one being removed. If you cannot |
| 56 |
> use simpler methods as mentioned. |
| 57 |
> |
| 58 |
> Clearly people have objections to warnings about packages users did not |
| 59 |
> install themselves.... |
| 60 |
> |
| 61 |
|
| 62 |
So the idea is to duplicate the functionality of '--depclean <package>' |
| 63 |
without actually checking to see if the package is a dependency, only |
| 64 |
whether it is listed in a set; or to check if it's a dependency of |
| 65 |
/something/ and, if so, redirect the user to the command they should be |
| 66 |
using anyway? |
| 67 |
|
| 68 |
-- |
| 69 |
Sam Jorna (wraeth) |
| 70 |
GnuPG ID: D6180C26 |
Archives