[gentoo-portage-dev] Fixing EAPI 8 --enable-static once and for all

[gentoo-portage-dev] Fixing EAPI 8 --enable-static once and for all

[David Seifert]

Attached a patch to finally fix https://bugs.gentoo.org/814380.

When I opened the bug, it was clear that I intended to only disable
static libtool archive building. Unfortunately, I hadn't done the
necessary due diligence, and it turns out how we detect the
"--enable-static" flag is overly broad and leads to a sizable number of
false positives in EAPI 8.

I have 937 EAPI 8 packages on my machine, and in 0 cases does my patch
now produce static libraries where none were produced before, while it
successfully reduces the annoying QA warnings on packages that don't use
libtool or use the flag for different purposes:

1. packages that have an "off-target"/false-positive flag triggering
   the current logic:

  dev-libs/nspr-4.35
    --enable-static-rtl     Use the MSVC static runtime library
  sys-fs/lvm2-2.03.16
    --enable-static_link    use this to link the tools to their libraries

2. packages with a real --{dis,en}able-static flag, but with semantics
   that don't actually disable building of static-libs:

  dev-util/strace-5.19
    --enable-static         link strace statically
  sys-process/htop-3.2.1
    --enable-static         build a static htop binary [default=no]
  media-video/mkvtoolnix-71.1.0
    --enable-static         make a static build of the applications (no)
    --enable-static-qt      link to static versions of the Qt library (no)

dev-util/strace has a $(use_enable static) option, and the other two are
default disabled. Hence in all of these cases, the patch does not change
the build output.

3. packages with a --{dis,en}able-static flag that controls building of
   static libraries, but with a slightly different --help output that
   doesn't trigger the updated glob anymore:

  dev-libs/icu-72.1
    --enable-static         build static libraries default=no
  dev-libs/nettle-3.8.1
    --disable-static        Do not build any static library
  net-print/cups-2.4.2
    --enable-static         install static libraries

All of these packages pass a $(use_enable static-libs static) option,
hence none of them would be affected by the missing --disable-static.

With this extensive analysis, I believe this patch to be safe.

[gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] Make EAPI 8 `--disable-static` logic libtool-specific

[David Seifert]

* The intention has always been to only target `configure` scripts that use
  libtool, not just any script with a `--disable-static*` option.

* libtool has been using the same `configure` format for at least
  the past 15 years (going back to libtool 1.5.22):

  1. shared and static libraries enabled (the main use case):
       --enable-shared[=PKGS]  build shared libraries [default=yes]
       --enable-static[=PKGS]  build static libraries [default=yes]

  2. shared libraries enabled and static libraries disabled:
       --enable-static[=PKGS]  build static libraries [default=no]
       --enable-shared[=PKGS]  build shared libraries [default=yes]

  3. shared libraries disabled and static libraries enabled:
       --enable-shared[=PKGS]  build shared libraries [default=no]
       --enable-static[=PKGS]  build static libraries [default=yes]

Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/814380
---
 bin/phase-helpers.sh | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/bin/phase-helpers.sh b/bin/phase-helpers.sh
index 2217e5a0b..6f691f6ff 100644
--- a/bin/phase-helpers.sh
+++ b/bin/phase-helpers.sh
@@ -655,8 +655,8 @@ econf() {
 			fi
 
 			if ___eapi_econf_passes_--disable-static; then
-				if [[ ${conf_help} == *--disable-static* || \
-						${conf_help} == *--enable-static* ]]; then
+				if [[ ${conf_help} == *--enable-shared\[=PKGS\]* &&
+						${conf_help} == *--enable-static\[=PKGS\]* ]]; then
 					conf_args+=( --disable-static )
 				fi
 			fi
-- 
2.38.1

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Fixing EAPI 8 --enable-static once and for all

[Ulrich Mueller]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 246 bytes --]

>>>>> On Sat, 19 Nov 2022, David Seifert wrote:

> With this extensive analysis, I believe this patch to be safe.

Still looks like an incompatible change, so it will need an EAPI bump.

EAPI 9 feature bug is here: https://bugs.gentoo.org/815169

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 507 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Fixing EAPI 8 --enable-static once and for all

[Michał Górny]

On Sat, 2022-11-19 at 09:33 +0100, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > > > > > On Sat, 19 Nov 2022, David Seifert wrote:
> 
> > With this extensive analysis, I believe this patch to be safe.
> 
> Still looks like an incompatible change, so it will need an EAPI bump.
> 
> EAPI 9 feature bug is here: https://bugs.gentoo.org/815169

I dare say we've done worse retroactive changes.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Fixing EAPI 8 --enable-static once and for all

[Mike Gilbert]

On Sat, Nov 19, 2022 at 3:33 AM Ulrich Mueller <ulm@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> >>>>> On Sat, 19 Nov 2022, David Seifert wrote:
>
> > With this extensive analysis, I believe this patch to be safe.
>
> Still looks like an incompatible change, so it will need an EAPI bump.
>
> EAPI 9 feature bug is here: https://bugs.gentoo.org/815169

I support this patch to fix Portage, regardless of what PMS says.
Coding to the spec doesn't make sense if the spec is broken.