| 1 |
On Fri, 1 Jul 2016 10:17:50 -0700 |
| 2 |
Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On 07/01/2016 09:42 AM, Duncan wrote: |
| 5 |
> > Zac Medico posted on Fri, 01 Jul 2016 08:35:26 -0700 as excerpted: |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> >>> But if you genuinely think this is a good idea, and someone else |
| 8 |
> >>> on the team does too, I won't oppose it. We should make sure that |
| 9 |
> >>> we strongly discourage its usage for regular users. Perhaps your |
| 10 |
> >>> suggested manpage addition already does -- I don't know. |
| 11 |
> >> |
| 12 |
> >> Yeah, I think the warning message that I've put in the man patch is |
| 13 |
> >> pretty good: |
| 14 |
> >> |
| 15 |
> >>> This option is intended to be used only with great caution, |
| 16 |
> >>> since it is possible for it to make nonsensical configuration |
| 17 |
> >>> changes which may lead to system breakage. Therefore, it is |
| 18 |
> >>> advisable to use ---ask together with this option. |
| 19 |
> > |
| 20 |
> > Perhaps rename the option so it makes perfectly clear the possible |
| 21 |
> > consequences? Something like --autounmask-breakme, or |
| 22 |
> > --auto-breakme ? |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> My experience with my wrapper script that gives similar behavior is |
| 25 |
> that it practically always "just works". It's fabulous for continuous |
| 26 |
> integration (aka tinderbox) settings. However, as with self-driving |
| 27 |
> cars, it deserves caution. |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> > Or alternatively, if there are other arguably dangerous options now |
| 30 |
> > or possible in the future, put them all under another option, |
| 31 |
> > --breakme, such that if that option isn't there, the otherwise |
| 32 |
> > dangerous options only print a warning and die. |
| 33 |
> > |
| 34 |
> > Then people can read the manpage if they really want to know what |
| 35 |
> > it does, but people who haven't, aren't as likely to blunder into |
| 36 |
> > it due to the stereotypical "rm -rf .*" type advice. |
| 37 |
> |
| 38 |
> It's simply not as risky as you're making it out to be. If it's a |
| 39 |
> production system, use --ask. Honestly, people who can't be exposed to |
| 40 |
> options like this should not have root access. |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
yeah, the development work I've been doing for work has me making a |
| 43 |
bunch of new ebuilds for pkgs not yet in the tree. |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
This feature would make it easier for sure. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
I also like the idea of this feature. |
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
I don't think there will be many users killing their system by |
| 50 |
overusing it or adding it to EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS. |
| 51 |
|
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
-- |
| 54 |
Brian Dolbec <dolsen> |
Archives