Re: [gentoo-dev] slot deps in package.mask and profiles

[Alec Warner]

On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 8:01 PM, Jeremy Olexa <darkside@g.o> wrote:
> Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
>>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Donnie Berkholz wrote:
>>>
>>> On 21:04 Sun 25 Jan     , Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, 24 Jan 2009 20:25:44 -0100
>>>> "Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto" <jmbsvicetto@g.o> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I talked to Zac <zmedico> earlier in #gentoo-portage about adding an
>>>>> entry to package.mask for KDE-4.2.0 using slot deps. Thomas
>>>>> <tanderson> and Patrick <bonsaikitten> raised the concern we might
>>>>> need profile eapis and that PMS nailed p.mask to EAPI-0.
>>>>> Zac confirmed that the first stable version to support slot deps in p.
>>>>> mask was 2.1.3.16, that it was stabled in bug 197165 - 14 months ago
>>>>> - - and that the first stages to include it were the 2008.0 stages.
>>>>> Thus, can we finally give the ok to use slot deps in package.mask? Can
>>>>> we also give the ok to use it everywhere in all 2008.0 and later
>>>>> profiles/ ?
>>>>
>>>> The Council approved profile eapi files for use a while ago (can't
>>>> remember when -- http://council.gentoo.org/ isn't being updated), and
>>>
>>> Last month's meeting
>>>
>>>> they discussed timeframes for using newer EAPIs then too. Did you see
>>>> that discussion?
>>>
>>> "An EAPI=0 profile always needs to exist so that users with old portage
>>> can upgrade. Otherwise they will sync and have no valid profile available so
>>> cannot emerge a new version of portage.
>>>
>>> "Decision: Approved. Existing stable profiles must use EAPI=0. New or dev
>>>                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>> profiles can use higher EAPIs.
>>
>> Acoording to this we will never be able to use slot deps in package.mask
>> as it's a global file. Given my first mail, can we agree to make EAPI-1
>> the minimum EAPI for files under profiles/ ? Can we also create a rule
>> on how / when to update the minimum EAPI in profiles/ ?
>
> So, portage that is unaware of EAPI-1 will just happily ignore the atom and
> move on..? In that case:
>
> Please no! It is hard enough for a base 2007.0 install to be upgraded due to
> the "portage & bash blocker" (and other issues) - We need to wait much
> longer for an EAPI bump in a non-new profile (if ever, as Brian Harring
> suggests - I agree).
>
> I know this might seem as a hassle to you but there *are* other entities
> that provide a base 2007.0 install. Who knows how every
> group/entity/company/etc use Gentoo.. While I agree that it isn't
> necessarily our problem, however, we shouldn't make it harder for them or
> anyone that has a 2007 base install. (We still mirror the 2007.0 stages[1],
> 2007.0 cds are available[2] for purchase, etc[3] etc[4]).

Dude, even people like Ubuntu/Canonical don't support stuff that old
(current LTS is April 2008).

The tree is now; see the date?  It's 2009, not 2007.

One of the biggest problems Gentoo has is backwards compatibility and
legacy stuff; it is the nightmare of every project and there has to be
a point where you say 'tough.'  So make a decision, announce it widely
that on X date the tree will just break for users; write up a FAQ on
how to upgrade past it, and then make the changes.

Realize once again that the tree was not designed very well and it has
issues on a number of levels and it can't all be engineered around;
and for progress to be made you will *have to break existing stuff*.

>
> IMO, it would be a dis-service to bump EAPI in a non-new profile for our
> user-base. I don't see any Pro's besides "easier to type" =/ So, I think the
> Council decision is appropriate.

You seriously see no benefits to EAPI 1 or 2 in profiles?  What about
slot deps? use deps? these things have been core feature requests
since 2003; surely you don't think they are useless to our users?

>
> -Jeremy
>
> [1]: http://distfiles.gentoo.org/releases/x86/2007.0/
> [2]: http://www.linuxcd.org/view_distro.php?lst=&id_cate=20&id_distro=12
> [3]: http://lylix.net/linux-vps-plans
> [4]: http://www.linode.com/faq.cfm
>
>>
>>> "Ref:
>>> http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_930f58fcebcbbcbe523c001f2c825179.xml"
>>>
>>>
>>> I haven't finished & posted last month's summary
>>> <http://dev.gentoo.org/~dberkholz/20081211-summary.txt> yet because of a
>>> long holiday vacation and lots of work deadlines after returning. I'll get
>>> all that stuff updated this week.
>>>
>
>
>