| 1 |
>>>>> On Tue, 14 Dec 2010, Jorge Manuel B S Vicetto wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> If you have anything you'd like to push to the council for |
| 4 |
> discussion, feel free to reply to this thread. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
I have two points: |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
1. In your November meeting [1] you had asked me to prepare a PMS |
| 9 |
patch for the last missing features of EAPI 4. That series of patches |
| 10 |
is ready [2] except for the following: |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
It has been suggested that the REQUIRED_USE variable should be |
| 13 |
accompanied by a new phase function that would be called if |
| 14 |
REQUIRED_USE assertions are not met. It would be similar to |
| 15 |
pkg_nofetch(). Specification of the function would be as follows: |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
,---- |
| 18 |
| pkg_required_use |
| 19 |
| ================ |
| 20 |
| |
| 21 |
| For EAPIs listed in table [..] as supporting REQUIRED_USE, the |
| 22 |
| pkg_required_use function may be called when at least one assertion |
| 23 |
| of the REQUIRED_USE variable is not met. The function should output |
| 24 |
| an appropriate explanation why these assertions failed. It may also |
| 25 |
| suggest USE flags to be adjusted by the user. |
| 26 |
| |
| 27 |
| pkg_required_use must not write to the filesystem. |
| 28 |
`---- |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
This is the last thing missing for EAPI 4, which I would really like |
| 31 |
to see finalised in 2010. (As the older ones of us may remember, ;-) |
| 32 |
its feature set was originally approved in April 2009, still called |
| 33 |
EAPI 3 at the time.) |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
So, could you please decide in the upcoming council meeting if we |
| 36 |
should have a pkg_required_use function, or not? See Bug 347353 [3] |
| 37 |
for the current status of discussion. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
2. To avoid such long delays as we have seen with EAPI 4, I would also |
| 40 |
like to suggest the following: New EAPI dependent features shall only |
| 41 |
be accepted if a preliminary patch for portage exists. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
Ulrich |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
[1] <http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20101130-summary.txt> |
| 46 |
[2] MERGE_TYPE: <http://bugs.gentoo.org/attachment.cgi?id=256075> |
| 47 |
REQUIRED_USE: <http://bugs.gentoo.org/attachment.cgi?id=256799> |
| 48 |
No slot operator dependencies, no profile IUSE injection: |
| 49 |
<http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-pms/msg_4b6e62d644717d42a2b25919889d46ee.xml> |
| 50 |
[3] <http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=347353> |
Archives