From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5E1D0139085 for ; Fri, 27 Jan 2017 16:28:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8511614312; Fri, 27 Jan 2017 16:27:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (woodpecker.gentoo.org [IPv6:2001:470:ea4a:1:5054:ff:fec7:86e4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3C56C1429A for ; Fri, 27 Jan 2017 16:27:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.2.10] (62.65.231.75.cable.starman.ee [62.65.231.75]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: leio) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B6A9F341645 for ; Fri, 27 Jan 2017 16:27:14 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <1485534429.22895.8.camel@gentoo.org> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] berkdb and gdbm in global USE defaults From: Mart Raudsepp To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2017 18:27:09 +0200 In-Reply-To: <5fa433b9-5057-b8e4-64f9-27ef2c67c400@gentoo.org> References: <1485503640.22895.2.camel@gentoo.org> <20170127083223.GK42019@gentoo.org> <5fa433b9-5057-b8e4-64f9-27ef2c67c400@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.22.3 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archives-Salt: a24bd85c-68a8-4760-a0f5-cf79d69fb876 X-Archives-Hash: e670008e19303e465056cacf6059200b Ühel kenal päeval, R, 27.01.2017 kell 13:08, kirjutas Kristian Fiskerstrand: > On 01/27/2017 01:01 PM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 8:54 AM, Mart Raudsepp > > wrote: > > > Ühel kenal päeval, N, 26.01.2017 kell 22:33, kirjutas Mike > > > Gilbert: > > > > I recently ran into a REQUIRED_USE constraint that required I > > > > select > > > > between berkdb and gdbm for an email client. > > > > > > There shouldn't be a REQUIRED_USE constraint that forces you to > > > select > > > one or the other. The maintainer should be giving the choice of > > > both, > > > but if only one can be chosen, the maintainer should make the > > > choice > > > for you by preferring one of them. Likely gdbm, given berkdb > > > licensing > > > saga. > > > > I'm not sure this makes sense to me. If the package will actually > > select one implementation out of a set, it makes sense to me that > > the > > maintainer for that package makes that choice explicit towards the > > user. In that case, setting REQUIRED_USE accordingly seems exactly > > right. The maintainer should set a good default, but if the user's > > USE > > settings are inconclusive in getting to the choice of > > implementation, > > it's better to whine explicitly than try to guess implicitly what > > the > > user wanted. > > I tend to agree with this sentiment, explicit over implicit behavior > ensures better debugging ability and security considerations. > It breaks the highly sought after "Gentoo is about choice" mantra. In this case, choice to not care and have the best chosen for me.