Mailing List Archive

Re: About time to unify 'cdda' and 'cdaudio' USE flags and make the remaining one global?
Jesús Guerrero <i92guboj@terra.es> posted
524cf6368e2642a1637e6e3054466e3d.squirrel@jesgue.homelinux.org, excerpted
below, on Tue, 07 Jul 2009 19:30:58 +0200:

> On Tue, July 7, 2009 15:35, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
>> Le mardi 07 juillet 2009 à 13:57 +0100, AllenJB a écrit : [snip]
>>
>>> Are users really going to want to fine-tune between just playing or
>>> also being able to rip/write audio cd's?
>>
>> I myself would probably not separate those features but they might be
>> because they pull a number of different libs.

> Ripping a cd just requires raw access to the device.

> Playing cdaudio requires a lot more stuff, besides many other thing it
> will require a working sound system

> You might use a computer to rip cdaudio to fill your portable mp3 player
> or to do backups, that doesn't mean that you want alsa in that machine,
> you might not even have speakers attached.

>> Getting informations from cddb or musicbrainz is another story
>> and I wouldn't like to see this notion merged with cdaudio.

> cddb must stay as it is, there's no reason to change that.

> Whether you pick cdda, cdaudio or audiocd is completely unimportant to
> me, the other two functionalities shouldn't have anything to do with
> this.

I don't really care whether the flags are merged or not, but what I'd
DEFINITELY find useful is per-package metadata on what the flag actually
does for that package.

If that means splitting flags down a bit, so the metadata is in the USE
flag itself (paranoia: paranoia support, cdda: cdda support, cdripping:
ripping support, alsa: alsa support, etc), great.

If it means it's just one big cdaudio flag, but each package has its own
metadata saying what it actually does with it, that's great too.
However, that'll mean a big change from today, as few packages have that
detailed metadata on what their USE flags actually do.

While we're at it, getting user-visible documentation on flag conflicts
would be nice, too. (also OR oss flag, if both are enabled, alsa is the
default, that type of comment in the metadata.)

It's frustrating and time consuming to have to dig into the ebuild code
itself to see what the dependency/support actually is, or even worse, to
have to dig into the package code or README/INSTALL files to get that
info.

How many times have I seen a USE flag and asked myself, OK, but what does
that actually MEAN, in terms of dependencies, etc?

An unrelated but good example of that is USE=doc. Fortunately, there's a
number of packages that have local descriptions. But it's way too few
compared to those that have it in IUSE but don't explain what it actually
means in the package. Is it huge dependencies, huge build-times, huge
size, simply unnecessary for the user, or a combination, if it's a
combination, which, and if it's dependencies, which ones? (This one is
at the top of my mind ATM due to the recent but now corrected USE=doc
abuse for kde4. Thanks, kde team, for fixing that. It was very
frustrating, but I realize the Gentoo packages were still in the heavy
development and experimentation stage.)

--
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
Re: Re: About time to unify 'cdda' and 'cdaudio' USE flags and make the remaining one global? [ In reply to ]
Let's finally move on regarding this topic. As I'm also in favour of
the "cdda" USE flag I'd like to know if there's any objection against the
decision to unify/convert the "cdaudio" USE flag into "cdda".
If there's no good reason against this conversion I will proceed with filing
bugs against packages using the "cdaudio" USE flag next weekend.

Lars Wendler (Polynomial-C)
Gentoo Staffer and bug-wrangler
Am Wednesday 08 July 2009 02:52:07 schrieb Duncan:
Re: Re: About time to unify 'cdda' and 'cdaudio' USE flags and make the remaining one global? [ In reply to ]
Lars Wendler wrote:
> Let's finally move on regarding this topic. As I'm also in favour of
> the "cdda" USE flag I'd like to know if there's any objection against the
> decision to unify/convert the "cdaudio" USE flag into "cdda".
> If there's no good reason against this conversion I will proceed with filing
> bugs against packages using the "cdaudio" USE flag next weekend.

I'll handle it; cdda it shall be since we already have cddb as well. The
technical term is the right one here.

-Samuli
Re: Re: About time to unify 'cdda' and 'cdaudio' USE flags and make the remaining one global? [ In reply to ]
Lars Wendler wrote:
> Let's finally move on regarding this topic. As I'm also in favour of
> the "cdda" USE flag I'd like to know if there's any objection against the
> decision to unify/convert the "cdaudio" USE flag into "cdda".
> If there's no good reason against this conversion I will proceed with filing
> bugs against packages using the "cdaudio" USE flag next weekend.

"next weekend", how about "done" ;-)

Thanks, Samuli
Re: Re: About time to unify 'cdda' and 'cdaudio' USE flags and make the remaining one global? [ In reply to ]
El mié, 22-07-2009 a las 18:45 +0300, Samuli Suominen escribió:
> Lars Wendler wrote:
> > Let's finally move on regarding this topic. As I'm also in favour of
> > the "cdda" USE flag I'd like to know if there's any objection against the
> > decision to unify/convert the "cdaudio" USE flag into "cdda".
> > If there's no good reason against this conversion I will proceed with filing
> > bugs against packages using the "cdaudio" USE flag next weekend.
>
> I'll handle it; cdda it shall be since we already have cddb as well. The
> technical term is the right one here.
>
> -Samuli
>

Have you think about enabling "cdda" USE flag by default in *desktop*
profiles? I think that most of "desktop" users will want to get cdaudio
support by default

Thanks :-)
Re: Re: About time to unify 'cdda' and 'cdaudio' USE flags and make the remaining one global? [ In reply to ]
Pacho Ramos wrote:
> Have you think about enabling "cdda" USE flag by default in *desktop*
> profiles? I think that most of "desktop" users will want to get cdaudio
> support by default

There's quite a few notebooks without cd/dvd drives around these days.
I cannot tell how much that's in percent of all desktop users but
we'll have a stats tool to answer questions like that from real world
data soon. :-)



Sebastian
Re: Re: About time to unify 'cdda' and 'cdaudio' USE flags and make the remaining one global? [ In reply to ]
Lars Wendler wrote:
> Let's finally move on regarding this topic. As I'm also in favour of
> the "cdda" USE flag I'd like to know if there's any objection against the
> decision to unify/convert the "cdaudio" USE flag into "cdda".
> If there's no good reason against this conversion I will proceed with filing
> bugs against packages using the "cdaudio" USE flag next weekend.
>
> Lars Wendler (Polynomial-C)
> Gentoo Staffer and bug-wrangler
> Am Wednesday 08 July 2009 02:52:07 schrieb Duncan:

I object. As discussed earlier in the list, I think "cdaudio" is much
more appropriate than "cdda".
Re: Re: About time to unify 'cdda' and 'cdaudio' USE flags and make the remaining one global? [ In reply to ]
Josh Saddler wrote:
> Lars Wendler wrote:
>> Let's finally move on regarding this topic. As I'm also in favour of
>> the "cdda" USE flag I'd like to know if there's any objection against the
>> decision to unify/convert the "cdaudio" USE flag into "cdda".
>> If there's no good reason against this conversion I will proceed with filing
>> bugs against packages using the "cdaudio" USE flag next weekend.
>>
>> Lars Wendler (Polynomial-C)
>> Gentoo Staffer and bug-wrangler
>> Am Wednesday 08 July 2009 02:52:07 schrieb Duncan:
>
> I object. As discussed earlier in the list, I think "cdaudio" is much
> more appropriate than "cdda".

As also discussed before, cdaudio is too vague and could mean various
things, while cdda is a very specific thing. This technically correct
term is less ambiguous, which is what we want here. Also, all the sound
herd people I spoke are in favour of cdda.

Ben
sound herd dev
Re: Re: About time to unify 'cdda' and 'cdaudio' USE flags and make the remaining one global? [ In reply to ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Pacho Ramos wrote:
> El mié, 22-07-2009 a las 18:45 +0300, Samuli Suominen escribió:
>> Lars Wendler wrote:
>>> Let's finally move on regarding this topic. As I'm also in favour of
>>> the "cdda" USE flag I'd like to know if there's any objection against the
>>> decision to unify/convert the "cdaudio" USE flag into "cdda".
>>> If there's no good reason against this conversion I will proceed with filing
>>> bugs against packages using the "cdaudio" USE flag next weekend.
>> I'll handle it; cdda it shall be since we already have cddb as well. The
>> technical term is the right one here.
>>
>> -Samuli
>>
>
> Have you think about enabling "cdda" USE flag by default in *desktop*
> profiles? I think that most of "desktop" users will want to get cdaudio
> support by default

Please don't.
Instead of having an ever larger collection of default use flags in the
desktop profile, we should be taking advantage of EAPI-1 IUSE defaults
and EAPI-2 use dependencies.
The reason I use the 2008.0 profile and not the desktop profile is the
large number of USE flags enabled in the desktop profile.
Does everyone using the desktop profile really need all of the following?

USE="acpi alsa branding cairo cdr dbus dvd dvdr dvdread eds emboss
encode esd evo fam firefox gif gnome gpm gstreamer gtk hal jpeg kde ldap
libnotify mad mikmod mp3 mpeg ogg opengl pdf png ppds qt3 qt3support qt4
quicktime sdl spell svg tiff truetype vorbis win32codecs unicode usb X
xml xulrunner xv"

Perhaps it's time we have a "thorough look" at the default USE flags for
the desktop profile. Putting my KDE hat on, I'd say most of the KDE
related use flags should probably be dropped and be left to the user or
the ebuilds.

> Thanks :-)
>
>

- --
Regards,

Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org
Gentoo- forums / Userrel / Devrel / SPARC / KDE
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEUEARECAAYFAkpn0xkACgkQcAWygvVEyAJN9gCY/BgGr2TuvX4DyZgEX0477jqb
bQCdHtHOvL5QfawGYmbSZQ4TN6SmO+o=
=ytcR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Re: Re: About time to unify 'cdda' and 'cdaudio' USE flags and make the remaining one global? [ In reply to ]
Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
> Pacho Ramos wrote:
>> Have you think about enabling "cdda" USE flag by default in *desktop*
>> profiles? I think that most of "desktop" users will want to get cdaudio
>> support by default
>
> Please don't.

I wasn't going to. Maybe not for the reasons expected; I just tend to
leave this to other developers, I'm using -*.
Re: Re: About time to unify 'cdda' and 'cdaudio' USE flags and make the remaining one global? [ In reply to ]
El jue, 23-07-2009 a las 03:06 +0000, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
escribió:
> Please don't.
> Instead of having an ever larger collection of default use flags in the
> desktop profile, we should be taking advantage of EAPI-1 IUSE defaults
> and EAPI-2 use dependencies.

It's other way to go, of course, and I don't have anything against
it :-)
Re: Re: About time to unify 'cdda' and 'cdaudio' USE flags and make the remaining one global? [ In reply to ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thu, 23 Jul 2009 03:06:36 +0000
"Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto" <jmbsvicetto@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Does everyone using the desktop profile really need all of the
> following?

Not the question to be asking. The question to ask is, for those people
who use packages where those flags are relevant, is enabling them the
best default behaviour?

There's nothing wrong with having USE="foo" set by default if only 1%
of users use any package that has IUSE="foo", if for those 1% foo being
on by default is the best option.

- --
Ciaran McCreesh
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkpobDwACgkQ96zL6DUtXhGMbgCgkGxx53fA/FEA+kPnGjzFiTbh
CH4An1QPCc7di4Bg+4r3HCqjLyMZN/4f
=lrtl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----