Mailing List Archive

Mike Frysinger wrote:
> as one of the new sane features of the next portage-2.1_pre release, we're
> looking to cut out use.defaults support
>
> existing stable users wont be affected as the 2.0.x versions will continue to
> carry support for this, but some of you stable users may notice some USE
> flags suddenly "disappearing"
>
> to recap, use.defaults inserts USE flags for you based upon what packages you
> have installed when you havent declared a preference. for example, if you
> have neither '-cups' or 'cups' in your USE (either in your make.conf,
> profile, env, whatever), but you do have the net-print/cups package
> installed, portage will add 'cups' to your USE

Can I just ask, since when is this "feature" on? I have never run into it...

Or is it because I always had:
USE="-* ${MY_USE}"
in /etc/make.conf?
Is "-*" counted as preference? I thought that is ignoring just the ones in
the profile ("just" is plain wrong, as I didn't even feel there were other
useflags :-)

Kalin

--
|[ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ]|
+-> http://ThinRope.net/ <-+
|[ ______________________ ]|

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 06:57:24AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> as one of the new sane features of the next portage-2.1_pre release, we're
> looking to cut out use.defaults support
>
> existing stable users wont be affected as the 2.0.x versions will continue to
> carry support for this, but some of you stable users may notice some USE
^^^^^^
> flags suddenly "disappearing"

I'm a bit confused, existing stable users won't be affected, but they
will notice use flags "disappearing"? Wouldn't that mean they are
affected or did you simply mistype and mean unstable?

> to recap, use.defaults inserts USE flags for you based upon what packages you
> have installed when you havent declared a preference. for example, if you
> have neither '-cups' or 'cups' in your USE (either in your make.conf,
> profile, env, whatever), but you do have the net-print/cups package
> installed, portage will add 'cups' to your USE

That's the current behaviour in stable 2.0.x and will be gone with
2.1, right?

I'm a little confused now, could you clarify this?

cheers,
Wernfried

--
Wernfried Haas (amne) - amne at gentoo dot org
Gentoo Forums: http://forums.gentoo.org
IRC: #gentoo-forums on freenode - email: forum-mods at gentoo dot org

On Friday 13 January 2006 11:15, Kalin KOZHUHAROV wrote:
> Or is it because I always had:
> USE="-* ${MY_USE}"
> in /etc/make.conf?

yes
-mike
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

On Friday 13 January 2006 11:15, Wernfried Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 06:57:24AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > existing stable users wont be affected as the 2.0.x versions will
> > continue to carry support for this, but some of you stable users may
> > notice some USE
> > flags suddenly "disappearing"
>
> I'm a bit confused, existing stable users won't be affected, but they
> will notice use flags "disappearing"? Wouldn't that mean they are
> affected or did you simply mistype and mean unstable?

correct, should have said unstable

> > to recap, use.defaults inserts USE flags for you based upon what packages
> > you have installed when you havent declared a preference. for example,
> > if you have neither '-cups' or 'cups' in your USE (either in your
> > make.conf, profile, env, whatever), but you do have the net-print/cups
> > package installed, portage will add 'cups' to your USE
>
> That's the current behaviour in stable 2.0.x and will be gone with
> 2.1, right?

yes
-mike
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 06:57:24AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> as one of the new sane features of the next portage-2.1_pre release, we're
> looking to cut out use.defaults support

Could you add a USE_ORDER without "auto" to /etc/make.globals for that
release, please, or alternatively provide some other way of checking
whether use.defaults is read? This would greatly help me out with ufed,
which currently has no way to check this, and instead has to hardcode
"env:pkg:conf:auto:defaults" as the default USE_ORDER just like portage
does.

Can we get this on the website/announce? I agree that auto-use is the
suck and that it needs to die a long excrutiating death, but I think a
lot of users will be like wtf when 2.1 hits stable and --newuse turns up
a massive crapload of packages.

Whether this announced now, or when portage-2.1 hits stable, or both, I
don't really care. If you need a ditty to post about it we can probably
whip one up.

Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Friday 13 January 2006 11:15, Kalin KOZHUHAROV wrote:
>
>>Or is it because I always had:
>> USE="-* ${MY_USE}"
>>in /etc/make.conf?
>
>
> yes
> -mike
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

On Fri, 2006-01-13 at 13:26 -0500, Alec Joseph Warner wrote:
> but I think a
> lot of users will be like wtf when 2.1 hits stable and --newuse turns
> up
> a massive crapload of packages.

Could we include a simple script to add these USE to the users make.conf
before they upgrade to 2.1. Without somthing like this, I see a wave of
'bugs' about it.
--
Lares Moreau <lares.moreau@gmail.com> | LRU: 400755 http://counter.li.org
lares/irc.freenode.net |
Gentoo x86 Arch Tester | ::0 Alberta, Canada
Public Key: 0D46BB6E @ subkeys.pgp.net | Encrypted Mail Preferred
Key fingerprint = 0CA3 E40D F897 7709 3628 C5D4 7D94 483E 0D46 BB6E

On Friday 13 January 2006 12:49, Harald van Dijk wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 06:57:24AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > as one of the new sane features of the next portage-2.1_pre release,
> > we're looking to cut out use.defaults support
>
> Could you add a USE_ORDER without "auto" to /etc/make.globals for that
> release, please, or alternatively provide some other way of checking
> whether use.defaults is read?

you should be able to get the value from `portageq envvar USE_ORDER`

i know this doesnt currently work, but imo that's a bug that should be fixed
-mike

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

On Fri, 2006-01-13 at 06:57 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> as one of the new sane features of the next portage-2.1_pre release, we're
> looking to cut out use.defaults support

I see this as a good and bad thing. Good in one hand that less autojunk
would be enabled like python/perl bindings not being added to every
program on your system that supports it. Bad in the other hand I see
the state of profiles getting worse=more bloated. The autouse itself is
not a bad feature or idea if it were used properly. Problem is that
it's not been used properly. If it were limited to simple things like
just X and the things that actually make sense then it would even be
fine to keep and would allow some of the more bloated (default-linux)
profiles to be cleaned up. Shrug. I like the existing behavior and the
power of deciding for myself when and where I want to take advantage of
USE_ORDER=



> existing stable users wont be affected as the 2.0.x versions will continue to
> carry support for this, but some of you stable users may notice some USE
> flags suddenly "disappearing"
>
> to recap, use.defaults inserts USE flags for you based upon what packages you
> have installed when you havent declared a preference. for example, if you
> have neither '-cups' or 'cups' in your USE (either in your make.conf,
> profile, env, whatever), but you do have the net-print/cups package
> installed, portage will add 'cups' to your USE
> -mike
--
solar <solar@gentoo.org>
Gentoo Linux

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

On Fri, 13 Jan 2006 15:13:02 -0500 solar <solar@gentoo.org> wrote:
| The autouse itself is not a bad feature or idea if it were used properly.
| Problem is that it's not been used properly.

No, it's bad. It's another thing that makes correct dependency
resolution impossible.

--
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (King of all Londinium)
Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org
Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm

On Fri, 2006-01-13 at 20:23 +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Jan 2006 15:13:02 -0500 solar <solar@gentoo.org> wrote:
> | The autouse itself is not a bad feature or idea if it were used properly.
> | Problem is that it's not been used properly.
>
> No, it's bad. It's another thing that makes correct dependency
> resolution impossible.

If your going to contradict somebody why don't you give more detail and
less opinion.

--
solar <solar@gentoo.org>
Gentoo Linux

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

On Fri, 13 Jan 2006 15:50:08 -0500 solar <solar@gentoo.org> wrote:
| On Fri, 2006-01-13 at 20:23 +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > On Fri, 13 Jan 2006 15:13:02 -0500 solar <solar@gentoo.org> wrote:
| > | The autouse itself is not a bad feature or idea if it were used
| > | properly. Problem is that it's not been used properly.
| >
| > No, it's bad. It's another thing that makes correct dependency
| > resolution impossible.
|
| If your going to contradict somebody why don't you give more detail
| and less opinion.

*shrug* It's pretty obvious. You probably already know this, but for
the benefit of those who really haven't thought about it rather than
those who just want to go around trolling... When a package that
toggles a USE flag gets installed, the dep resolver has to go back and
regenerate the deplist with that USE flag changed. However, this can
cause the package that would have enabled the USE flag to no longer be
installed.

--
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (King of all Londinium)
Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org
Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm

IMHO a lot of the auto-use stuff that is "mis-used" is moreso what IUSE
defaults is for. I have a crappy patch for IUSE defaults that I may try
to work on so that it can be merged in the 2.1/2.2 branch. I realize
that this is probably a bit far off, but will hopefully improve the
situation.

Of course at that point we can dump the crappy nocxx flags too ;)

solar wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-01-13 at 06:57 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>
>>as one of the new sane features of the next portage-2.1_pre release, we're
>>looking to cut out use.defaults support
>
>
> I see this as a good and bad thing. Good in one hand that less autojunk
> would be enabled like python/perl bindings not being added to every
> program on your system that supports it. Bad in the other hand I see
> the state of profiles getting worse=more bloated. The autouse itself is
> not a bad feature or idea if it were used properly. Problem is that
> it's not been used properly. If it were limited to simple things like
> just X and the things that actually make sense then it would even be
> fine to keep and would allow some of the more bloated (default-linux)
> profiles to be cleaned up. Shrug. I like the existing behavior and the
> power of deciding for myself when and where I want to take advantage of
> USE_ORDER=
>
>
>
>
>>existing stable users wont be affected as the 2.0.x versions will continue to
>>carry support for this, but some of you stable users may notice some USE
>>flags suddenly "disappearing"
>>
>>to recap, use.defaults inserts USE flags for you based upon what packages you
>>have installed when you havent declared a preference. for example, if you
>>have neither '-cups' or 'cups' in your USE (either in your make.conf,
>>profile, env, whatever), but you do have the net-print/cups package
>>installed, portage will add 'cups' to your USE
>>-mike
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

On Friday 13 January 2006 15:13, solar wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-01-13 at 06:57 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > as one of the new sane features of the next portage-2.1_pre release,
> > we're looking to cut out use.defaults support
>
> I see this as a good and bad thing. Good in one hand that less autojunk
> would be enabled like python/perl bindings not being added to every
> program on your system that supports it. Bad in the other hand I see
> the state of profiles getting worse=more bloated.

i dont really see the profiles getting any more USE flags than they already
have ... as for bloated, i see it as being a more-than-worth-it trade off
when it comes to stability

a profile-based USE will always stay the same while a autouse-based USE may
fluctuate greatly based upon what the user emerges from day to day

> The autouse itself is not a bad feature or idea if it were used properly.

there is no used properly or improperly when it comes to use.defaults
-mike
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 04:39:38PM -0700, Duncan wrote:
> Harald van Dijk posted <20060113174942.GA17335@gentoo.org>, excerpted
> below, on Fri, 13 Jan 2006 18:49:42 +0100:
>
> > On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 06:57:24AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> >> as one of the new sane features of the next portage-2.1_pre release, we're
> >> looking to cut out use.defaults support
> >
> > Could you add a USE_ORDER without "auto" to /etc/make.globals for that
> > release, please, or alternatively provide some other way of checking
> > whether use.defaults is read? This would greatly help me out with ufed,
> > which currently has no way to check this, and instead has to hardcode
> > "env:pkg:conf:auto:defaults" as the default USE_ORDER just like portage
> > does.
>
> According to previous posts, USE_ORDER will be going away with
> use.defaults, because that was really the only reason it was there in the
> first place as there's no other sane ordering possible, if it is removed.

There are other sane orderings possible, one being pkg:env:conf:defaults
so that USE=xxx emerge -NpDuv world will show exactly what adding xxx to
make.conf will do. I don't recall where I saw this, unfortunately, but I
do know that some people actually use it for this. (Okay, maybe that's
really the only other sane ordering.)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

<snip>
>>According to previous posts, USE_ORDER will be going away with
>>use.defaults, because that was really the only reason it was there in the
>>first place as there's no other sane ordering possible, if it is removed.
>
>
> There are other sane orderings possible, one being pkg:env:conf:defaults
> so that USE=xxx emerge -NpDuv world will show exactly what adding xxx to
> make.conf will do. I don't recall where I saw this, unfortunately, but I
> do know that some people actually use it for this. (Okay, maybe that's
> really the only other sane ordering.)

I would prefer to keep USE_ORDER for now, since I was going to replace
the "auto" dict with the "default-iuse" which means you can choose not
to stack these new flags. Although it may be a hack, we have no better
way of managing use flag stacks at the moment.

- -Alec Warner
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
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=dbSA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Harald van Dijk posted <20060113174942.GA17335@gentoo.org>, excerpted
below, on Fri, 13 Jan 2006 18:49:42 +0100:

> On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 06:57:24AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> as one of the new sane features of the next portage-2.1_pre release, we're
>> looking to cut out use.defaults support
>
> Could you add a USE_ORDER without "auto" to /etc/make.globals for that
> release, please, or alternatively provide some other way of checking
> whether use.defaults is read? This would greatly help me out with ufed,
> which currently has no way to check this, and instead has to hardcode
> "env:pkg:conf:auto:defaults" as the default USE_ORDER just like portage
> does.

According to previous posts, USE_ORDER will be going away with
use.defaults, because that was really the only reason it was there in the
first place as there's no other sane ordering possible, if it is removed.

--
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 in
http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/22/rms_interview.html


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Alec Warner posted <43C8745C.6010007@egr.msu.edu>, excerpted below, on
Fri, 13 Jan 2006 22:47:40 -0500:

> <snip>
>>>According to previous posts, USE_ORDER will be going away with
>>>use.defaults, because that was really the only reason it was there in the
>>>first place as there's no other sane ordering possible, if it is removed.
>>
>>
>> There are other sane orderings possible, one being pkg:env:conf:defaults
>> so that USE=xxx emerge -NpDuv world will show exactly what adding xxx to
>> make.conf will do. I don't recall where I saw this, unfortunately, but I
>> do know that some people actually use it for this. (Okay, maybe that's
>> really the only other sane ordering.)
>
> I would prefer to keep USE_ORDER for now, since I was going to replace
> the "auto" dict with the "default-iuse" which means you can choose not
> to stack these new flags. Although it may be a hack, we have no better
> way of managing use flag stacks at the moment.

I was wondering... but nobody challenged it at the time the plan was
mentioned (the previous posts I referred to), and that's one thing I
haven't messed with (yet?), so /I/ was keeping quiet.

Maybe I misunderstood the entire thing, but I don't think so because I
remember being rather unconfortable with it just being outright dismissed
like that.

--
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 in
http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/22/rms_interview.html


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list