[gentoo-catalyst] catalyst's ccache USE flag seems a bit stupid

[gentoo-catalyst] catalyst's ccache USE flag seems a bit stupid

[Matt Turner]

In the catalyst ebuild we have

    # Here is where we actually enable ccache
    use ccache && \
        dosed 's:options="autoresume kern:options="autoresume ccache kern:' \
        /etc/catalyst/catalyst.conf
    dosed "s:/usr/lib/catalyst:/usr/$(get_libdir)/catalyst:" \
        /etc/catalyst/catalyst.conf

The ccache USE flag simply adds ccache to RDEPEND and trivially
modifies a .conf file.

Can we assume that people using catalyst are smart enough to realize
that if they turn on ccache in the .conf file that they need to
install ccache?

Matt

Re: [gentoo-catalyst] catalyst's ccache USE flag seems a bit stupid

[Sebastian Pipping]

On 06/25/2011 04:07 AM, Matt Turner wrote:
> In the catalyst ebuild we have
> 
>     # Here is where we actually enable ccache
>     use ccache && \
>         dosed 's:options="autoresume kern:options="autoresume ccache kern:' \
>         /etc/catalyst/catalyst.conf
>     dosed "s:/usr/lib/catalyst:/usr/$(get_libdir)/catalyst:" \
>         /etc/catalyst/catalyst.conf
> 
> The ccache USE flag simply adds ccache to RDEPEND and trivially
> modifies a .conf file.

Confirming.


> Can we assume that people using catalyst are smart enough to realize
> that if they turn on ccache in the .conf file that they need to
> install ccache?

I agree we can assume that^^^.

I am not sure what you are suggesting for change, though:

 (A) Removing use flag ccache altogether?

       That could result in the uninstallation of the
       ccache package if it was the sole dependency of catalyst.
       Correct?

 (B) Remove the sed magic only?

       That would remove the comfort of automatic addition
       of option ccache.  Any gains?

 (C) Something else?

Best,




Sebastian

Re: [gentoo-catalyst] catalyst's ccache USE flag seems a bit stupid

[Matt Turner]

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 10:17 PM, Sebastian Pipping <sping@gentoo.org> wrote:
> I am not sure what you are suggesting for change, though:
>
>  (A) Removing use flag ccache altogether?
>
>       That could result in the uninstallation of the
>       ccache package if it was the sole dependency of catalyst.
>       Correct?

Indeed, emerge --prune would remove ccache.

>  (B) Remove the sed magic only?
>
>       That would remove the comfort of automatic addition
>       of option ccache.  Any gains?
>
>  (C) Something else?

I might suggest removing all ccache-related stuff in the ebuild and
adding a few einfo lines to the ebuild suggesting to the user to
emerge ccache (so that it'll be in @world) and how to modify
catalyst.conf to enable it. Do you think that would be OK?

It just seems like the USE flag is the wrong way of doing this.

(I'm so glad to see you working on catalyst. I've got a number of
patches that I need to commit, especially now that I see some other
activity)

Thanks!
Matt

Re: [gentoo-catalyst] catalyst's ccache USE flag seems a bit stupid

[Sebastian Pipping]

On 06/25/2011 05:55 AM, Matt Turner wrote:
> I might suggest removing all ccache-related stuff in the ebuild and
> adding a few einfo lines to the ebuild suggesting to the user to
> emerge ccache (so that it'll be in @world) and how to modify
> catalyst.conf to enable it. Do you think that would be OK?
> 
> It just seems like the USE flag is the wrong way of doing this.

I don't know.  dev-util/metro seems to pull in ccache in a similar way.
 I would love to hear a third voice on this.


> (I'm so glad to see you working on catalyst. I've got a number of
> patches that I need to commit, especially now that I see some other
> activity)

Please go ahead.

Best,



Sebastian