1 |
On sob, 2017-07-08 at 15:21 -0700, Daniel Campbell wrote: |
2 |
> On 07/08/2017 02:43 AM, Michał Górny wrote: |
3 |
> > Hi, everyone. |
4 |
> > |
5 |
> > I think the affairs have settled enough and I've finished filling |
6 |
> > in the pre-GLEP for REQUIRED_USE auto-enforcing. It's got all |
7 |
> > the algorithms, rationale and separated reference implementation. |
8 |
> > |
9 |
> > If there are no major concerns raised, I will soon start working |
10 |
> > on writing an optimized implementation for pkgcore/pkgcheck |
11 |
> > and integrating the verification algos with the CI. |
12 |
> > |
13 |
> > The pre-GLEP for review is here: |
14 |
> > |
15 |
> > https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/User:MGorny/GLEP:ReqUse |
16 |
> > |
17 |
> > TIA. |
18 |
> > |
19 |
> |
20 |
> This has grown quite a bit since first recommended! Great job so far. |
21 |
> Forgive me if I missed something, but wouldn't it be helpful to the user |
22 |
> to let them know when automatically choosing for them? A single line in |
23 |
> a logfile, einfo output, whatever, would be useful for people wondering |
24 |
> how certain packages got pulled in. Users will continue to get errors if |
25 |
> the constraints aren't met (or are wrong), but where will information go |
26 |
> that indicates the automatic solver's choice? You and I can read an |
27 |
> ebuild and guess from the dep spec, but what will a user look at? |
28 |
> |
29 |
> I searched the GLEP page for "log", "einfo", and "output" with no |
30 |
> results. If I've missed something please let me know. |
31 |
> |
32 |
> Thanks for the work that's been put into this so far. |
33 |
> |
34 |
|
35 |
Indeed I have entirely skipped the user output problem, and left it |
36 |
purely for package manager's design choice. Do you really feel like we |
37 |
need to explicitly specify it? I think it's best if package manager |
38 |
authors decide how to best fit it into whatever output the PMs already |
39 |
have. |
40 |
|
41 |
|
42 |
-- |
43 |
Best regards, |
44 |
Michał Górny |