View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Meeuw Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 08 Nov 2002 Posts: 77 Location: NL - Oostzaan
|
Posted: Mon May 02, 2005 10:50 am Post subject: inherited use flags a bad feature? |
|
|
I've recently cleaned my USE flags and discovered a feature documented here: Inheriting USE-flags, as my mission was to minimalize the amount of USE flags I liked it.
Now a gentoo developer on bugzilla doesn't like it, because "This feature is buggy, illogical and likely to be dropped", who knows if this is true?
I think it is a good feature because it automatically manages the USE flags. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Genone Retired Dev
Joined: 14 Mar 2003 Posts: 9555 Location: beyond the rim
|
Posted: Mon May 02, 2005 2:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It can be nice, but also frustrating, and it is really a pain to handle correctly in portage, so we would really like to drop it. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Meeuw Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 08 Nov 2002 Posts: 77 Location: NL - Oostzaan
|
Posted: Mon May 02, 2005 4:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Could you please explain to me what the frustrations are?
I think it's logical to enable ie. the cups use flag when cups is installed, or X when virtual/x11 is installed. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ciaranm Retired Dev
Joined: 19 Jul 2003 Posts: 1719 Location: In Hiding
|
Posted: Mon May 02, 2005 5:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's a mess. It makes dep resolution utterly screwy. Also, the handbook is rather wrong... /me goes to file a bug |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Meeuw Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 08 Nov 2002 Posts: 77 Location: NL - Oostzaan
|
Posted: Mon May 02, 2005 5:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Please post the url to the bug... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Carlo Developer
Joined: 12 Aug 2002 Posts: 3356
|
Posted: Mon May 02, 2005 5:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Meeuw wrote: | I think it's logical to enable ie. the cups use flag when cups is installed |
Installing cups doesn't necessarily mean, that you want to build everything with cups support. You start with a clean, well defined profile and then arbirtrary ebuilds, you don't have any control about, destroy it. This feature may be convenient, if you don't care about this - but if you do it's a pita. _________________ Please make sure that you have searched for an answer to a question after reading all the relevant docs. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ciaranm Retired Dev
Joined: 19 Jul 2003 Posts: 1719 Location: In Hiding
|
Posted: Mon May 02, 2005 6:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Meeuw wrote: | Please post the url to the bug... |
91198 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Meeuw Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 08 Nov 2002 Posts: 77 Location: NL - Oostzaan
|
Posted: Mon May 02, 2005 6:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Carlo, as you might have guessed, I'm the bugger on bugzilla (sorry about that...)
I think the following scenero's are possible:
a. enable use flag when package is emerged (my preference)
b. keep use flag disabled when package is emerged
I think b is illogical, an user can always decide to disable the use flag in make.conf.
EDIT: b |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Carlo Developer
Joined: 12 Aug 2002 Posts: 3356
|
Posted: Mon May 02, 2005 6:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Meeuw: As I wrote above, a is illogical, since you cannot rely on the configuration you started with. You may love it to accumulate dependencies, but the idea behind it is plain broken. There are also (other) portage related reasons, why it has to r.i.p. _________________ Please make sure that you have searched for an answer to a question after reading all the relevant docs. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Meeuw Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 08 Nov 2002 Posts: 77 Location: NL - Oostzaan
|
Posted: Mon May 02, 2005 7:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Carlo wrote: | a is illogical, since you cannot rely on the configuration you started with. | You can say the samething about b, because you cannot rely on the configuration you ended with
If you want to start with a USE situation you've ended with you should use emerge --info's USE flags.
Carlo wrote: | You may love it to accumulate dependencies, but the idea behind it is plain broken. | I admit it might be broken for new installations, but it is a nice feature while installing new software.
Carlo wrote: | There are also (other) portage related reasons, why it has to r.i.p. | If this is true it would be a good reason to kill it. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Carlo Developer
Joined: 12 Aug 2002 Posts: 3356
|
Posted: Mon May 02, 2005 7:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Meeuw wrote: | Carlo wrote: | a is illogical, since you cannot rely on the configuration you started with. | You can say the samething about b, because you cannot rely on the configuration you ended with |
No. It is the users job to define the configuration he wants. It's his inability, if he doesn't not care.
a) use.defaults entries force portage to trick you - you loose control
b) your decision _________________ Please make sure that you have searched for an answer to a question after reading all the relevant docs. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Meeuw Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 08 Nov 2002 Posts: 77 Location: NL - Oostzaan
|
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 7:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
anyway, this should be removed or properly maintained. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kallamej Administrator
Joined: 27 Jun 2003 Posts: 4975 Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
|
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 11:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Moved from Portage & Programming, not a support request. _________________ Please read our FAQ Forum, it answers many of your questions.
irc: #gentoo-forums on irc.libera.chat |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Pigeon Guru
Joined: 21 Jun 2002 Posts: 307
|
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 12:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't like 'em either. For instance: xmms supports arts, via the arts use flag. I hate arts, because it sucks, so have the arts use flag disabled. Then I install some random package which relies on arts as a dependency, and arts is installed. Whenever I upgrade xmms, xmms will include arts support; which I don't want it to have. Since I'm likely to uninstall any package which depends on arts as soon as I can find a replacement for it, I will have to emerge --newuse world and likely revdep-rebuild because removing arts will break all the programs that I don't want to include arts support but do anyway, just becauseof inherited use flags. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
alkan Guru
Joined: 06 Aug 2004 Posts: 385 Location: kasimlar yaylasi
|
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 1:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i second for dropping the inherited use flags. Because of the reasons people mentioned here.
Maybe it can be an option in the /etc/make.conf
INHERIT_USE="yes|no" |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Meeuw Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 08 Nov 2002 Posts: 77 Location: NL - Oostzaan
|
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 2:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well I wouldn't miss it THAT much
Maybe a einfo (or ewarn?) in the approriate ebuilds would be sufficient:
Code: | if ! use xxx ; then
einfo "To enable ${PN} support in other packages you should enable the xxx USE flag"
fi |
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
ciaranm Retired Dev
Joined: 19 Jul 2003 Posts: 1719 Location: In Hiding
|
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 2:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
alkan wrote: | i second for dropping the inherited use flags. Because of the reasons people mentioned here.
Maybe it can be an option in the /etc/make.conf
INHERIT_USE="yes|no" |
Uh, it's already an option. Read the man pages. I'm not going to tell you how, because it's one of those lovely variables which lets you really bugger your system up, but it is in the docs... It's even in the handbook.
Edit: actually, it's not explicitly in the handbook, just the man pages.
Last edited by ciaranm on Wed May 04, 2005 2:41 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Genone Retired Dev
Joined: 14 Mar 2003 Posts: 9555 Location: beyond the rim
|
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 2:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ciaranm wrote: | alkan wrote: | i second for dropping the inherited use flags. Because of the reasons people mentioned here.
Maybe it can be an option in the /etc/make.conf
INHERIT_USE="yes|no" |
Uh, it's already an option. Read the man pages. I'm not going to tell you how, because it's one of those lovely variables which lets you really bugger your system up, but it is in the docs... It's even in the handbook. |
Urgh it is? Shouldn't be there ... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
alkan Guru
Joined: 06 Aug 2004 Posts: 385 Location: kasimlar yaylasi
|
Posted: Thu May 05, 2005 2:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: | Uh, it's already an option. Read the man pages. I'm not going to tell you how, because it's one of those lovely variables which lets you really bugger your system up, but it is in the docs... It's even in the handbook. |
let me guess. Is it USE_ORDER?
defaults to USE_ORDER="env:pkg:conf:auto:defaults"
USE_ORDER="env:conf:[auto?!!!]:defaults" should do it. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
truekaiser l33t
Joined: 05 Mar 2004 Posts: 801
|
Posted: Thu May 05, 2005 3:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
i find it rather annoying.
to me it's a space issue, every update i find one or two in the list that are new but have to be installed because of this.. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jamapii l33t
Joined: 16 Sep 2004 Posts: 637
|
Posted: Thu May 05, 2005 10:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
I guess leaving the ":pkg:" out of USE_ORDER would disable /etc/portage/package.use , so don't do it |
|
Back to top |
|
|
spb Retired Dev
Joined: 02 Jan 2004 Posts: 2135 Location: Cambridge, UK
|
Posted: Thu May 05, 2005 12:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If you're guessing about what each one does, you really shouldn't be messing with USE_ORDER. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
alkan Guru
Joined: 06 Aug 2004 Posts: 385 Location: kasimlar yaylasi
|
Posted: Thu May 05, 2005 1:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I learn a lot from messing around and breaking things. That's why I have a 3rd 10G HD installed. Thanks for the warning tough.
thanks jamapii for the pkg warning. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ciaranm Retired Dev
Joined: 19 Jul 2003 Posts: 1719 Location: In Hiding
|
Posted: Thu May 05, 2005 2:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
When you people suddenly find that your arch use flag vanishes, and ebuilds start to explode in really really really strange ways... If you must tinker... At least read the docs properly. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
alkan Guru
Joined: 06 Aug 2004 Posts: 385 Location: kasimlar yaylasi
|
Posted: Fri May 06, 2005 1:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
not me, I am not "you people", whoever that might be (must be the gentoo community). 99% of the time ebuilds fail on me when there is a bug. Thanks to the forums, bugzilla, hardworking developers and my experience, there is usually a work around until it is fixed in the portage tree.
I didn't ask if there is a secret variable and developers to reveail it. I merely suggested something that i wasn't aware it is already in.
there is nothing wrong breaking my gentoo. it is up to me as long as I don't bother you if it is broken due to my own stupidity. If it is not my gentoo then i try to go with the book, I am successfully running gentoo on 5 dual cpu xeons, 3.8,6GB,1TB HD; 11 amd64s; and 4 P4s. I couldn't do that if i didn't play around and broke things in the first place even if i had memorized whole gentoo documentation. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|