[gentoo-dev] new local USE var: vim-with-x

[gentoo-dev] new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Aron Griffis]

Some people want /usr/bin/vim linked against X.  Some people think
that's a bug.  There are decent arguments either direction.  See bugs
19115 and 20093 for some discussion.

Now you can have it either way...

    emerge vim                  # does not link against X libs

    USE=vim-with-x emerge vim   # links against X, might emerge xfree

I left the default to refrain from linking against X because I figure
most users aren't hardcore vimmers and aren't going to care.  In that
case, linking against the X libs is likely to cause them trouble rather
than ease it.  But for those users that want the support, it's there.

Aron

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Björn Lindström]

Aron Griffis <agriffis@gentoo.org> [20030429 02:14]:
> I left the default to refrain from linking against X because I figure
> most users aren't hardcore vimmers and aren't going to care.  In that
> case, linking against the X libs is likely to cause them trouble
> rather than ease it.  But for those users that want the support, it's
> there.

This is really ugly. The expected behaviour would doubtlessly be that
USE=X means that vim will have X support.

Wouldn't using X combined with a suitable ewarning be better?

...or perhaps ignoring USE=X and use USE=gtk(2?) and possibly USE=kde
instead?

-- 
Björn Lindström <bkhl@privat.utfors.se>
Home page: http://hem.fyristorg.com/bkhl/
Blog: http://bkhl.livejournal.com/
Elektrubadur demo: http://hem.fyristorg.com/bkhl/elektrubadur/


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Aron Griffis]

Hi Björn,

Björn Lindström wrote:	[Mon Apr 28 2003, 09:16:44PM EDT]
> This is really ugly. The expected behaviour would doubtlessly be that
> USE=X means that vim will have X support.
> 
> Wouldn't using X combined with a suitable ewarning be better?

Unfortunately I think you are wrong.  Most users that I have encountered
do not expect "emerge vim" to pull in xfree, even when USE=X.  This is a
very frequently asked question on IRC and in the mailing lists.

Here is the history of the behavior in the vim ebuild:

1. The original vim ebuilds had "X? ( x11-base/xfree )".  This confused
   a lot of users who did not expect their first action of "emerge vim"
   to also demand xfree.  Adding warnings is not really sufficient since
   the damage has been done when they hit enter; portage will start with
   the first dependency in the list, not with the vim ebuild itself.

2. The next solution was to leave xfree out of DEPEND.  In this case,
   USE=X was honored, but only if xfree was already merged on the
   system.  This is clearly wrong since it has a dependency on the
   environment which is not controlled by the ebuild.  As a resuilt,
   some users would have one thing and other users would have another.

3. Next, I changed vim to refrain from linking against X altogether, on
   the assumption that the gvim ebuild would bu sufficient for users
   wanting an X-linked ebuild.

4. Finally, I made the behavior dependent on a local USE var, trying to
   capture the expectations of the typical user, while providing an
   escape route for those particular users who want a vim linked against
   the X libraries.  Keep in mind this is not a gui version of vim (that
   is provided by the gvim ebuild), it's just the particular bits that
   allow X interaction while in a terminal.  For example, xterm title
   setting, X clipboard support for vim selections, and moving the
   cursor using the mouse.  I have seen very few users that demand those
   particular features from vim, so it doesn't make sense to me to give
   the vim ebuild such a heavy dependency.

> ...or perhaps ignoring USE=X and use USE=gtk(2?) and possibly USE=kde
> instead?

I find it hard to believe that would be an improvement.  The vim ebuild
clearly doesn't depend on those toolkits; they're used by the gvim
ebuild.  No user is going to have a clue that USE=kde is causing their
console vim ebuild to pull in xfree...

Thanks for your suggestions.  If you can convince me there's a better
way than what I've done, I'll gladly consider making the change in the
ebuild.  :-)

Aron

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Mike Lundy]

[-- Attachment #1: signed data --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 2924 bytes --]

On Monday 28 April 2003 23:32, Aron Griffis wrote:
> Unfortunately I think you are wrong.  Most users that I have
> encountered do not expect "emerge vim" to pull in xfree, even when
> USE=X.  This is a very frequently asked question on IRC and in the
> mailing lists.

This means they have a fundamental misunderstanding of the use flags. If 
they tell vim they want X, it builds with X support. Why would someone 
have X in their use flags if they didn't want X support?

> confused a lot of users who did not expect their first action of
> "emerge vim" to also demand xfree.  Adding warnings is not really
> sufficient since the damage has been done when they hit enter;
> portage will start with the first dependency in the list, not with
> the vim ebuild itself.

This means that they don't understand use flags AND they don't use 
--pretend first. Flying blind...

> 3. Next, I changed vim to refrain from linking against X altogether,
> on the assumption that the gvim ebuild would bu sufficient for users
> wanting an X-linked ebuild.

Ick. See below.

> 4. Finally, I made the behavior dependent on a local USE var, trying
> to capture the expectations of the typical user, while providing an
> escape route for those particular users who want a vim linked against
> the X libraries.  Keep in mind this is not a gui version of vim (that
> is provided by the gvim ebuild), it's just the particular bits that
> allow X interaction while in a terminal.  For example, xterm title
> setting, X clipboard support for vim selections, and moving the
> cursor using the mouse.  I have seen very few users that demand those
> particular features from vim, so it doesn't make sense to me to give
> the vim ebuild such a heavy dependency.

Count one vote for me. I don't use gvim at all, but I do enjoy vim's 
connection to X. I think one reason many people don't ask for it is 
they assume it- no proof of this, of course, but the X interaction is 
not a big thing, just a lot of little things that are quite handy- it's 
quite possible they get overlooked.

> Thanks for your suggestions.  If you can convince me there's a better
> way than what I've done, I'll gladly consider making the change in
> the ebuild.  :-)

Now that I've successfully managed to come off as elitist, let me 
attempt to defend myself :) Use flags seem to me a most obvious thing. 
USE="X" means use X. If a package with optional X support does not use 
X when I've told it to via the X use flag, I'd consider that a bug. 
There's no reason to add additional use flags for something that seems 
to stem from a misunderstanding of the distro one is using. You can 
only hold someone's hand for so long - it's better to educate the 
misguided user than make the use flag system inconsistent.

-- 
To smash a single atom, all mankind was intent.
Now any day the atom may return the compliment.

[-- Attachment #2: signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Bill Kenworthy]

Because if you build vim with X in your use flags and you try and run
"vim" from a non-X console or a console ssh session it wont run!  I have
had to stuff around compiling vim with USE="-X" with two machines now so
I could fix other problems from a console remote login.  vim should
default to -X unless overidden specifically and locally.  Note that you
do want X support for most other apps though, so honouring a global USE
is not a good idea for vim..

BillK

On Tue, 2003-04-29 at 14:24, Mike Lundy wrote:

> This means they have a fundamental misunderstanding of the use flags. If 
> they tell vim they want X, it builds with X support. Why would someone 
> have X in their use flags if they didn't want X support?
> 



--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Patrick Börjesson]

> Because if you build vim with X in your use flags and you try and run
> "vim" from a non-X console or a console ssh session it wont run!  I

I'd vote for vim not depending on X for this specific reason. Just
because I have X as a USE-flag it doesn't mean that I use X _all_ the
time and would like to be able to use vim in a non-X environment (like
when before starting X in the console)

Patrick Börjesson

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Chris Watson]

It seems to me that vim could do with being able to learn
about any 'environmental' constraints it maybe be under,
perhaps via a wrapper.  Then the ebuild could build both
vim and vimx, with the wrapper sorting it out.

Hey I am running under X, lets do funky stuff:call vimx.  I am not
running under X, so do some other cool stuff instead:call vim.  

Chris Watson


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Patrick Kursawe]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 548 bytes --]

On Tue, Apr 29, 2003 at 11:23:36AM +0100, Chris Watson wrote:
> It seems to me that vim could do with being able to learn
> about any 'environmental' constraints it maybe be under,
> perhaps via a wrapper.  Then the ebuild could build both
> vim and vimx, with the wrapper sorting it out.
> 
> Hey I am running under X, lets do funky stuff:call vimx.  I am not
> running under X, so do some other cool stuff instead:call vim.  

I was always happy with a simple "unset DISPLAY".

What exactly is your problem with that?

Bye, Patrick

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Mark Gordon]

On 29 Apr 2003 14:36:17 +0800
Bill Kenworthy <billk@iinet.net.au> wrote:

> On Tue, 2003-04-29 at 14:24, Mike Lundy wrote:
> 
> > This means they have a fundamental misunderstanding of the use
> > flags. If they tell vim they want X, it builds with X support. Why
> > would someone have X in their use flags if they didn't want X
> > support?

> Because if you build vim with X in your use flags and you try and run
> "vim" from a non-X console or a console ssh session it wont run!  I
> have had to stuff around compiling vim with USE="-X" with two machines
> now so I could fix other problems from a console remote login.  vim
> should default to -X unless overidden specifically and locally.  Note
> that you do want X support for most other apps though, so honouring a
> global USE is not a good idea for vim..

I have similar problems. I sometimes have to ssh to a machine that does
NOT support X forwarding, then ssh from there to one of my Gentoo boxes
to do things. It is a real pain to have vim fail because I have not
got X forwarding. I know there are ways to work around it, but it is
unexpected behaviour when there is a separate ebuild for vim with GUI
support.

If/when portage preserves overrides of USE on doing an upgrade it will
be easier for those of us that want vim without X for remote access but
most other things with X support.

I don't think you will ever make everyone happy whatever you do :-/
-- 
Mark Gordon
Paid to be a Geek & a Senior Software Developer
Currently looking for a new job commutable from Slough, Berks, U.K.
Although my email address says spamtrap, it is real and I read it.

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Björn Lindström]

Bill Kenworthy <billk@iinet.net.au> [20030429 08:36]:
> Because if you build vim with X in your use flags and you try and run
> "vim" from a non-X console or a console ssh session it wont run!  I
> have had to stuff around compiling vim with USE="-X" with two machines
> now so I could fix other problems from a console remote login.

That's easy to fix. Just let "emerge vim" with USE=X install
/usr/bin/vim as a text mode vim _and_ /usr/bin/(g|k)vim as the GUI
version.

> vim should default to -X unless overidden specifically and locally.
> Note that you do want X support for most other apps though, so
> honouring a global USE is not a good idea for vim..

I still think this is ugly. If you asked for X support, you get it.
What's so strange about that?

-- 
Björn Lindström <bkhl@privat.utfors.se>
Home page: http://hem.fyristorg.com/bkhl/
Blog: http://bkhl.livejournal.com/
Elektrubadur demo: http://hem.fyristorg.com/bkhl/elektrubadur/


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Fredrik Jagenheim]

On Tue, Apr 29, 2003 at 03:05:21PM +0200, Björn Lindström wrote:
> That's easy to fix. Just let "emerge vim" with USE=X install
> /usr/bin/vim as a text mode vim _and_ /usr/bin/(g|k)vim as the GUI
> version.

But, vim with X is NOT the same as (g|k)vim. The latter is a graphical
GUI while the former is a terminalbased, but has X hooks.

> I still think this is ugly. If you asked for X support, you get it.
> What's so strange about that?

It seems that in some circumstances, DISPLAY is set when you login,
even if you have no X running. This causes vim to think that there ARE
some instance of X running, and thus it fails to start.

It seems related to ssh, and I think the problem is really there. If
'unset DISPLAY' works, as someone in this thread mentioned, it's a
much better solution than the vim-with-x flag.

//H

-- 
To segfault is human; to bluescreen moronic. 

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Björn Lindström]

Fredrik Jagenheim <humming@pobox.com> [20030429 15:12]:
> But, vim with X is NOT the same as (g|k)vim. The latter is a graphical
> GUI while the former is a terminalbased, but has X hooks.

If that is what you think, you should advocate gvim/kvim as separate
packages, not introducing some new weird USE flag.

-- 
Björn Lindström <bkhl@privat.utfors.se>
Home page: http://hem.fyristorg.com/bkhl/
Blog: http://bkhl.livejournal.com/
Elektrubadur demo: http://hem.fyristorg.com/bkhl/elektrubadur/


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Bartosch Pixa]

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

Björn Lindström wrote:

|Fredrik Jagenheim <humming@pobox.com> [20030429 15:12]:
|
|>But, vim with X is NOT the same as (g|k)vim. The latter is a graphical
|>GUI while the former is a terminalbased, but has X hooks.
|
|
|If that is what you think, you should advocate gvim/kvim as separate
|packages, not introducing some new weird USE flag.
|
they ARE separate packages.

- --Bartosch Pixa
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQE+rn2yv54ZzFJKh9YRAlU+AKCeEGq+m6F/3084noFoUm+z7egVAQCgmF6k
U+SFw0wB75G/6rQr4aq50Pc=
=xrML
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Fredrik Jagenheim]

On Tue, Apr 29, 2003 at 03:18:28PM +0200, Björn Lindström wrote:
> Fredrik Jagenheim <humming@pobox.com> [20030429 15:12]:
> > But, vim with X is NOT the same as (g|k)vim. The latter is a graphical
> > GUI while the former is a terminalbased, but has X hooks.
> 
> If that is what you think, you should advocate gvim/kvim as separate
> packages, not introducing some new weird USE flag.

Huh?

They are separate packages...

And, did you even read what I wrote? Like the part where I mentioned a
better solution than the weird USE flag.

//H

-- 
To segfault is human; to bluescreen moronic. 

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[William Kenworthy]

Strange - plenty!  vim is a console program and gvim and kvim are X
based - so until I had a failure and needed a pure console vim, I didnt
know this would occur.  True you can compile vim with X hooks, but why
in a console based program?, when it means that on a system that has
failed i.e., see how many (including me!) people have had X failures
when installing xfree-4.3.  vim is my fallback editor for when gvim isnt
available, and all of a sudden, it fails right when I need it most!

Perhaps we need a 4th package to keep the frustrated X types happy -
vim-with-x, rather than a USE variable which is just not up to this
task.  Then everyone can install the vim that suits them, e.g., vim,
xvim, kvim and gvim.

BillK


On Tue, 2003-04-29 at 21:05, Björn Lindström wrote:
> Bill Kenworthy <billk@iinet.net.au> [20030429 08:36]:
> > Because if you build vim with X in your use flags and you try and run
> > "vim" from a non-X console or a console ssh session it wont run!  I
> > have had to stuff around compiling vim with USE="-X" with two machines
> > now so I could fix other problems from a console remote login.
> 
> That's easy to fix. Just let "emerge vim" with USE=X install
> /usr/bin/vim as a text mode vim _and_ /usr/bin/(g|k)vim as the GUI
> version.
> 
> > vim should default to -X unless overidden specifically and locally.
> > Note that you do want X support for most other apps though, so
> > honouring a global USE is not a good idea for vim..
> 
> I still think this is ugly. If you asked for X support, you get it.
> What's so strange about that?
-- 
William Kenworthy <billk@iinet.net.au>


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Björn Lindström]

William Kenworthy <billk@iinet.net.au> [20030429 15:44]:
> Perhaps we need a 4th package to keep the frustrated X types happy -
> vim-with-x, rather than a USE variable which is just not up to this
> task.  Then everyone can install the vim that suits them, e.g., vim,
> xvim, kvim and gvim.

AFAIK there is no xvim, only kvim and gvim. Thus my (admittedly bad)
suggestion to look only att the USE flags for gtk and kde.

-- 
Björn Lindström <bkhl@privat.utfors.se>
Home page: http://hem.fyristorg.com/bkhl/
Blog: http://bkhl.livejournal.com/
Elektrubadur demo: http://hem.fyristorg.com/bkhl/elektrubadur/


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Aron Griffis]

Bill Kenworthy wrote:	[Tue Apr 29 2003, 02:36:17AM EDT]
> Because if you build vim with X in your use flags and you try and run
> "vim" from a non-X console or a console ssh session it wont run!  I
> have had to stuff around compiling vim with USE="-X" with two machines
> now so I could fix other problems from a console remote login.  vim
> should default to -X unless overidden specifically and locally.  Note
> that you do want X support for most other apps though, so honouring a
> global USE is not a good idea for vim..

Just to throw one more thought out there...  The behavior you describe
above is actually a bug.  It's fixed in vim 6.1.474 and in 6.2a.  I
haven't put 6.1.474 into portage because of the existence of 6.2a and
because I don't know if there's a gtk2 patch for 6.1.474.

The bug is this: vim normally detects if the X connection fails and
falls back to pure text mode.  However for a while during the 6.1
patches, it would fail under some circumstances and return you to a
prompt.

In truth the fact that this bug has been remedied makes it more
plausible to depend on the global USE=X, but I'm still concerned about
first-time installs.

Aron

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Mark Gordon]

On Tue, 29 Apr 2003 09:10:37 -0400
Aron Griffis <agriffis@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Bill Kenworthy wrote:	[Tue Apr 29 2003, 02:36:17AM EDT]
> > Because if you build vim with X in your use flags and you try and
> > run"vim" from a non-X console or a console ssh session it wont run! 
> > I have had to stuff around compiling vim with USE="-X" with two
> > machines now so I could fix other problems from a console remote
> > login.  vim should default to -X unless overidden specifically and
> > locally.  Note that you do want X support for most other apps
> > though, so honouring a global USE is not a good idea for vim..
> 
> Just to throw one more thought out there...  The behavior you describe
> above is actually a bug.  It's fixed in vim 6.1.474 and in 6.2a.  I
> haven't put 6.1.474 into portage because of the existence of 6.2a and
> because I don't know if there's a gtk2 patch for 6.1.474.
> 
> The bug is this: vim normally detects if the X connection fails and
> falls back to pure text mode.  However for a while during the 6.1
> patches, it would fail under some circumstances and return you to a
> prompt.

That explains why it worked when I just tested the condition that was
causing me failures before.

> In truth the fact that this bug has been remedied makes it more
> plausible to depend on the global USE=X, but I'm still concerned about
> first-time installs.

I don't think that is a big issue. If you want X installed you will
install it, so whether it is pulled in when you install vim or at some
other point is not such a big issue. You can always override at the
command line for the initial build, and once X is installed linking to
it is not a problem now that it still works if X is not available.

So I now change my vote to going back to using the normal X use flag.
-- 
Mark Gordon
Paid to be a Geek & a Senior Software Developer
Currently looking for a new job commutable from Slough, Berks, U.K.
Although my email address says spamtrap, it is real and I read it.

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Was: (Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x ) Default USE Flags Revision

[Adrian Almenar]

Then what about make a new revision of default USE flags now and make a 
ballot about which flags should be activated by default and which disabled ?

I really think we need to check default USE flags.

Best Regards,

Adrian Almenar
Gentoo Developer
Java Team

---

Aron Griffis wrote:
 >In truth the fact that this bug has been remedied makes it more
 >plausible to depend on the global USE=X, but I'm still concerned about
 >first-time installs.
 >Aron


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Was: (Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x ) Default USE Flags Revision

[Jon Portnoy]

Disabling X by default would not be beneficial.

On Tue, Apr 29, 2003 at 11:00:07AM -0400, Adrian Almenar wrote:
> Then what about make a new revision of default USE flags now and make a 
> ballot about which flags should be activated by default and which disabled ?
> 
> I really think we need to check default USE flags.
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Adrian Almenar
> Gentoo Developer
> Java Team
> 
> ---
> 
> Aron Griffis wrote:
> >In truth the fact that this bug has been remedied makes it more
> >plausible to depend on the global USE=X, but I'm still concerned about
> >first-time installs.
> >Aron
> 
> 
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

-- 
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Was: (Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x ) Default USE Flags Revision

[Daniel Armyr]

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

| Then what about make a new revision of default USE flags now and make a
| ballot about which flags should be activated by default and which
| disabled ?
I would definately vote for a less is more approach. But that depends on
how one interprates what gentoo is. However, I understand
non-bloatedness is cosidered pivotal.

- --
=========================================
daniel.armyr@home.se     f00-dar@f.kth.se

C118 KEVII Hall
1A Kent Ridge Rd S.119224
Singapore                 PGP@pgp.mit.edu
=========================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQE+rpWPhxtTUWLs2lERAnBNAKCxNJSyqR6KIJzYsQ5pG68K5sYmFACePgRg
2/LbNii9vtqgMEBz+CryjM4=
=7Sel
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Max Kalika]

Quoting Bill Kenworthy <billk@iinet.net.au>:

> ... Note that you do want X support for most other apps though, so
> honouring a global USE is not a good idea for vim..

This is yet another reason why portage needs to have support for USE flags
to be applied on a per-package basis.

  <http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13616>

With this, users who don't want their vim to try to connect to X on
invocation can just plop "( app-editors/vim -X )" in their USE variable and
only vim is affected.

---max kalika
--max@lsit.ucsb.edu
-lsit systems administrator

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Daniel Armyr]

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


| This is yet another reason why portage needs to have support for USE flags
| to be applied on a per-package basis.

Hm, I love the way the USE flags are working, but I definatey think it
is time to look over the system. I think we have scaled it up as far as
it goes soon, and Gentoo isn't exactly shrinking.
//Daniel Armyr

- --
=========================================
daniel.armyr@home.se     f00-dar@f.kth.se

C118 KEVII Hall
1A Kent Ridge Rd S.119224
Singapore                 PGP@pgp.mit.edu
=========================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQE+rorBhxtTUWLs2lERAiYvAJ4n5RDQfUXkZGtfEomrysxQ7Zyx+gCffyxu
uQ9JxuXn6912RBIEtajNfso=
=N3tB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Max Kalika]

Quoting Daniel Armyr <daniel.armyr@home.se>:

>| This is yet another reason why portage needs to have support for USE
>| flags to be applied on a per-package basis.
> 
> Hm, I love the way the USE flags are working, but I definatey think it
> is time to look over the system. I think we have scaled it up as far as
> it goes soon, and Gentoo isn't exactly shrinking.

Well, fortunately this doesn't change the way "stock" USE flags are
handled.  The per-package stuff is optional for finer-grained control of
your installed apps.

---max kalika
--max@lsit.ucsb.edu
-lsit systems administrator

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Caleb Shay]

What about a profile selection that sets the default USE flags? 
Something along the lines of:

server: USE="-X -gtk -qt -kde -gnome"
gnome-workstation: USE="X gnome gtk"
kde-workstation: USE="X qt kde"

You get the idea.

Just my US$0.02

Caleb

On Tue, 2003-04-29 at 10:49, Max Kalika wrote:
> Quoting Daniel Armyr <daniel.armyr@home.se>:
> 
> >| This is yet another reason why portage needs to have support for USE
> >| flags to be applied on a per-package basis.
> > 
> > Hm, I love the way the USE flags are working, but I definatey think it
> > is time to look over the system. I think we have scaled it up as far as
> > it goes soon, and Gentoo isn't exactly shrinking.
> 
> Well, fortunately this doesn't change the way "stock" USE flags are
> handled.  The per-package stuff is optional for finer-grained control of
> your installed apps.
> 
> ---max kalika
> --max@lsit.ucsb.edu
> -lsit systems administrator
> 
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[William Kenworthy]

I agree this is fine in theory, but what I am trying to push is that
building vim with X is a *BAD* idea because if you lose X as happens
occasionally (see the forums for problems with the current XFree-4.3
upgrade), you can (and in my case it *HAS* happened), be left with a
system without a viable editor - workstation, server or whatever.  I
noted that the particular problem I had is likely to be a vim bug, since
fixed, but the email that mentioned this did give instances where even
the fixed vim may fail.

I think this is a case where an exception should be made because the
likelyhood of less skilled users being left editor-less is high - and I
base this on the fact that its happened to me twice, on two different
systems!  One had even been built with USE=-X, but the last upgrade
overuled it and used the environment +X in the build, and I missed it:
much to my disgust when X refused to restart due to a bad XF86Config!.

BillK

On Tue, 2003-04-29 at 23:31, Caleb Shay wrote:
> What about a profile selection that sets the default USE flags? 
> Something along the lines of:
> 
> server: USE="-X -gtk -qt -kde -gnome"
> gnome-workstation: USE="X gnome gtk"
> kde-workstation: USE="X qt kde"
> 
> You get the idea.
> 
> Just my US$0.02
> 
> Caleb



--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Björn Lindström]

William Kenworthy <billk@iinet.net.au> [20030429 18:05]:
> I agree this is fine in theory, but what I am trying to push is that
> building vim with X is a *BAD* idea because if you lose X as happens
> occasionally (see the forums for problems with the current XFree-4.3
> upgrade), you can (and in my case it *HAS* happened), be left with a
> system without a viable editor - workstation, server or whatever.

I don't get this. Where I sit, gvim launches vim if it can't connect to
an X server.

-- 
Björn Lindström <bkhl@privat.utfors.se>
Home page: http://hem.fyristorg.com/bkhl/
Blog: http://bkhl.livejournal.com/
Elektrubadur demo: http://hem.fyristorg.com/bkhl/elektrubadur/


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Mark Gordon]

On Tue, 29 Apr 2003 20:28:47 +0200
Björn Lindström <bkhl@privat.utfors.se> wrote:

> William Kenworthy <billk@iinet.net.au> [20030429 18:05]:
> > I agree this is fine in theory, but what I am trying to push is that
> > building vim with X is a *BAD* idea because if you lose X as happens
> > occasionally (see the forums for problems with the current XFree-4.3
> > upgrade), you can (and in my case it *HAS* happened), be left with a
> > system without a viable editor - workstation, server or whatever.
> 
> I don't get this. Where I sit, gvim launches vim if it can't connect
> to an X server.

The problem occurs if for some reason /usr/X11R6/lib/libXt.so.6 is
not available. Say if /usr has been corrupted or an emerge of xfree got
screwed.

Possibly an "EMERGENCY_EDITOR" variable somewhere would be useful and
whichever editor is listed there is installed in the root partition and
statically linked if possible?
-- 
Mark Gordon
Paid to be a Geek & a Senior Software Developer
Currently looking for a new job commutable from Slough, Berks, U.K.
Although my email address says spamtrap, it is real and I read it.

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[William Kenworthy]

The problem is that if you build vim with USE=X, and X is not running,
vim will not start as it cannot see X (note that I am talking about
console vim running in a console with no X, not gvim.)  

This was apparently a bug in vim at one time, but even the bugfixed
console version can want X in some circumstances that are likely to
catch people out when can they least expect or afford it (e.g., X
failure: how do you edit XF86Config quickly if you have no X and
therefore no vim: has happened to me!).

To me, the question is whether to stick with a convention that is not
appropriate in this circumstance, or do a logical workaround that can
satisfactorily overcome this behaviour.

Can someone define why console vim needs X anyway, apart from the highly
critical trick of putting a title on the X window?


BillK

On Wed, 2003-04-30 at 02:28, Björn Lindström wrote:
> William Kenworthy <billk@iinet.net.au> [20030429 18:05]:
> > I agree this is fine in theory, but what I am trying to push is that
> > building vim with X is a *BAD* idea because if you lose X as happens
> > occasionally (see the forums for problems with the current XFree-4.3
> > upgrade), you can (and in my case it *HAS* happened), be left with a
> > system without a viable editor - workstation, server or whatever.
> 
> I don't get this. Where I sit, gvim launches vim if it can't connect to
> an X server.
-- 
William Kenworthy <billk@iinet.net.au>


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Peter Fein]

On 30 Apr 2003 07:49:10 +0800
William Kenworthy <billk@iinet.net.au> wrote:

> This was apparently a bug in vim at one time, but even the bugfixed
> console version can want X in some circumstances that are likely to
> catch people out when can they least expect or afford it (e.g., X
> failure: how do you edit XF86Config quickly if you have no X and
> therefore no vim: has happened to me!).

This is just a silly reason already - did you nuke nano or something?
>From vim --help:

   -X                   Do not connect to X server

Users who can't figure out to try --help are probably going to generate line noise by trying to use vi in the first place. ;)
 
> To me, the question is whether to stick with a convention that is not
> appropriate in this circumstance, or do a logical workaround that can
> satisfactorily overcome this behaviour.

While we can continue the vim-with-x vs. X battle royale, I:

a) think X is better
b) really don't care
c) withdraw any ill-will toward developers who avoid -dev
d) was seriously hoping this would turn in to a vi vs. emacs war

Perhaps someone should set up a forum poll? ;)

> Can someone define why console vim needs X anyway, apart from the highly
> critical trick of putting a title on the X window?

Causing grief to those who bork their XF86Config? ;)

(All flames meant in the friendliest spirit.)

-- 
Peter Fein
pfein@pobox.com
773-575-0694

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[William Kenworthy]

On Wed, 2003-04-30 at 08:29, Peter Fein wrote:
> On 30 Apr 2003 07:49:10 +0800
> William Kenworthy <billk@iinet.net.au> wrote:

> This is just a silly reason already - did you nuke nano or something?

Yes, since corrected!

> From vim --help:
> 
>    -X                   Do not connect to X server
> 
> Users who can't figure out to try --help are probably going to generate line noise by trying to use vi in the first place. ;)
>  

whoops, I didnt read help, should have realised something like this
might be present

> > To me, the question is whether to stick with a convention that is not
> > appropriate in this circumstance, or do a logical workaround that can
> > satisfactorily overcome this behaviour.
> 
> While we can continue the vim-with-x vs. X battle royale, I:
> 
> a) think X is better
> b) really don't care
> c) withdraw any ill-will toward developers who avoid -dev
> d) was seriously hoping this would turn in to a vi vs. emacs war
> 
> Perhaps someone should set up a forum poll? ;)
> 
> > Can someone define why console vim needs X anyway, apart from the highly
> > critical trick of putting a title on the X window?
> 
> Causing grief to those who bork their XF86Config? ;)
> 
> (All flames meant in the friendliest spirit.)
-- 
William Kenworthy <billk@iinet.net.au>


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Björn Lindström]

William Kenworthy <billk@iinet.net.au> [20030430 02:47]:
> d) was seriously hoping this would turn in to a vi vs. emacs war

Heh, it's nevet to late...

-- 
Björn Lindström <bkhl@privat.utfors.se>
Home page: http://hem.fyristorg.com/bkhl/
Blog: http://bkhl.livejournal.com/
Elektrubadur demo: http://hem.fyristorg.com/bkhl/elektrubadur/


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[James H. Cloos Jr.]

>>>>> "William" == William Kenworthy <billk@iinet.net.au> writes:

William> The problem is that if you build vim with USE=X, and X is not
William> running, vim will not start as it cannot see X

(First, I should note that the real problem occurs when the dynamic
linker cannot find all of the libs /usr/bin/vim is linked against, as
will occur if eg /usr/X11Rb/lib is corrupted.)

The solution is for the vim ebuild to build not only a full-featured
/usr/bin/vim, but also a /bin/vim that links only to libs in /lib.

This is a standard thing to do; gentoo should follow suit.

Even gentoo's nvi ebuild fails to accomplish this, since gentoo puts
libdb.so in /usr/lib.

It would probably help to move libattr.so from /usr/lib to /lib.
That would mean the current vim ebuild would only have to leave out X
and gpm support to work in /bin.

Although it should also *silently* ignore a missing VIMRUNTIME
directory, skipping things like syntax highlighting in that case.

And lastly the default PATH should use the proper /usr/local/bin
/usr/bin /bin order, instead of the /bin /usr/bin /usr/local/bin
order gentoo currently uses.  (A bug in /etc/profile; login.defs
gets it right.)

-JimC



--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[torbenh]

On Tue, Apr 29, 2003 at 10:22:59PM +0800, Daniel Armyr wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> 
> | This is yet another reason why portage needs to have support for USE flags
> | to be applied on a per-package basis.
> 
> Hm, I love the way the USE flags are working, but I definatey think it
> is time to look over the system. I think we have scaled it up as far as
> it goes soon, and Gentoo isn't exactly shrinking.

i dont have DSL at home and use my laptop as an rsync server for my
desktop. Both machines have different USE flags. 

i rsync the distfiles directories also.

so i fetch files using emerge -f programx 

rsync to desktop 

emerge programx on desktop

this obviously does not work very good :)
especially because i want to emerge gnome and have USE="-gnome" on the
laptop....

this situation could be solved by USE profiles.
USE="gnome" emerge -f programx
should solve the problem also.

but i often forget that.

the use profile could be associated with the emerge action.

are the use flags now saved in the database ?


-- 
torben Hohn
http://galan.sourceforge.net -- The graphical Audio language

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Dan Armak]

[-- Attachment #1: signed data --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 839 bytes --]

On Tuesday 29 April 2003 21:46, torbenh@gmx.de wrote:
> i dont have DSL at home and use my laptop as an rsync server for my
> desktop. Both machines have different USE flags.
>
> i rsync the distfiles directories also.
>
> so i fetch files using emerge -f programx
>
> rsync to desktop
>
> emerge programx on desktop
>
> this obviously does not work very good :)

There's a FEATURES flag somewhere that makes portage fetch all distfiles that 
might be needed for any combination of use flags. We use it to generate 
digests that include md5sums for all files. I'm not sure which one it is; 
possibly the 'digest' one, in which case portage will ignore bad digests, so 
be careful :-)

-- 
Dan Armak
Gentoo Linux developer (KDE)
Matan, Israel
Public GPG key: http://cvs.gentoo.org/~danarmak/danarmak-gpg-public.key

[-- Attachment #2: signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Brad Laue]

Bill Kenworthy wrote:
> Because if you build vim with X in your use flags and you try and run
> "vim" from a non-X console or a console ssh session it wont run!

Sure it will. It will run in console mode, as it should.

I think the X USE variable is fine. The idea of an ebuild depending on 
the environment in which it is built is the entire point of the exercise 
of using Gentoo Linux. USE flags are complex and easy to misunderstand, 
but I don't think PEBKAC is the thing that should dictate the 
architecture of portage.

Brad

-- 
// -- http://www.BRAD-X.com/ -- //


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Celestial Wizard]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 967 bytes --]

On Tue, 2003-04-29 at 16:24, Mike Lundy wrote:

> Now that I've successfully managed to come off as elitist, let me 
> attempt to defend myself :) Use flags seem to me a most obvious thing. 
> USE="X" means use X. If a package with optional X support does not use 
> X when I've told it to via the X use flag, I'd consider that a bug. 
> There's no reason to add additional use flags for something that seems 
> to stem from a misunderstanding of the distro one is using. You can 
> only hold someone's hand for so long - it's better to educate the 
> misguided user than make the use flag system inconsistent.


I agree.  As I keep telling our sales staff, just because there is a
technical solution, doesn't mean it is the only, or even the best,
solution.

Education should ALWAYS be chosen over a technical modification /
solution


--
Celestial Wizard
RHCE
President SEBLUG - South East Brisbane Linux Users Group
http://www.seblug.org/

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 1536 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Björn Lindström]

Aron Griffis <agriffis@gentoo.org> [20030429 05:32]:
> Thanks for your suggestions.  If you can convince me there's a better
> way than what I've done, I'll gladly consider making the change in the
> ebuild.  :-)

Well, making a USE-flag specific for one package seems weird to me. Then
I would rather have it as it is now, with gvim and kvim being separate
packages.

-- 
Björn Lindström <bkhl@privat.utfors.se>
Home page: http://hem.fyristorg.com/bkhl/
Blog: http://bkhl.livejournal.com/
Elektrubadur demo: http://hem.fyristorg.com/bkhl/elektrubadur/


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Martin Schlemmer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1412 bytes --]

On Tue, 2003-04-29 at 05:32, Aron Griffis wrote:
> Hi Björn,
> 
> Björn Lindström wrote:	[Mon Apr 28 2003, 09:16:44PM EDT]
> > This is really ugly. The expected behaviour would doubtlessly be that
> > USE=X means that vim will have X support.
> > 
> > Wouldn't using X combined with a suitable ewarning be better?
> 
> Unfortunately I think you are wrong.  Most users that I have encountered
> do not expect "emerge vim" to pull in xfree, even when USE=X.  This is a
> very frequently asked question on IRC and in the mailing lists.
> 

This thread got way too long, so I will skip it ... say if this was
suggested before.

Lets see if we got this right:

  We do not want vim to pull in X, but in some cases we still want it
  to be able to use X (not gvim, but vim with X hooks).

What about for normal vim:

1)  Do not take heed of the 'X' use flag, except then it is '-X',
    or [ -z "`use X`" ], and then disabled it totally.

2)  Do not DEPEND on X under any circumstances.

3)  Do however build X support if we detect X ... meaning, do not
    add a --with-x or --without-x (or whatever), except for 1).

We then will have vim that do not pull in X, but if you really want
X support, you just go:

  # emerge xfree vim

if X is not already installed.



-- 

Martin Schlemmer
Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop/System Team Developer
Cape Town, South Africa



[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Aron Griffis]

Hi Azarah,

Martin Schlemmer wrote:[Tue Apr 29 2003, 02:16:30PM EDT]
> 1)  Do not take heed of the 'X' use flag, except then it is '-X',
>     or [ -z "`use X`" ], and then disabled it totally.
> 
> 2)  Do not DEPEND on X under any circumstances.
> 
> 3)  Do however build X support if we detect X ... meaning, do not
>     add a --with-x or --without-x (or whatever), except for 1).

If you read my first email in this thread, you'll see that I don't think
this is a valid solution.  The reason is that it means that vim will be
built differently purely depending on the environment.  Part of the
point of USE and DEPEND is that we get a deterministic build.  I think
the solution of the local USE flag, despite its drawbacks, is better
than depending on the installed environment.

Aron

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Grant Goodyear]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1487 bytes --]

First of all, let me thank agriffis for maintaining the vim ebuilds. 
Given the thousands (okay, only hundreds, but still) of patches
involved, maintaining vim is quite a challenge.

It seems to me that the fundamental problem is one of user education
about the meaning of USE flags.  Having people do 'USE="-X" emerge vim'
to emerge vim without X support is principally a problem because (a)
people don't expect that vim might depend on X, and (b) often don't know
how to turn off X support anyway.

I propose that we go ahead and have vim build with X support if people
don't override the +X useflag, since that's most inline with Gentoo
philosophy.  At the same time, to minimize the number of bug reports I
suggest that we also take the opportunity to discuss USE flags in the
context of vim (and other console text editors) in the install docs. 
The install docs are the only docs that we really know almost all of our
users actually read, so a brief primer about USE flags would be quite
useful there, and vim is a good package to talk about since the absence
or presence of X in USE makes a huge and obvious difference to the build
process, which helps drive home the point about how customizable Gentoo
is.

-g2boojum-

PS.  I'm currently swamped grading a 5-inch stack of physical chemistry
take-home finals, but once I get that finished I would be happy to write
the proposed section for the install guide.
-- 
Grant Goodyear <g2boojum@gentoo.org>

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] new local USE var: vim-with-x

[Troy Dack]

On Wed, 2003-04-30 at 01:46, Grant Goodyear wrote:
> It seems to me that the fundamental problem is one of user education
> about the meaning of USE flags.

Sounds about right.

>   Having people do 'USE="-X" emerge vim'
> to emerge vim without X support is principally a problem because (a)
> people don't expect that vim might depend on X, and (b) often don't know
> how to turn off X support anyway.

Or haven't been bothered to investigate just how Gentoo works

> I propose that we go ahead and have vim build with X support if people
> don't override the +X useflag, since that's most inline with Gentoo
> philosophy.

Hear, Hear!!  That is the whole point of USE flags!

>   At the same time, to minimize the number of bug reports I
> suggest that we also take the opportunity to discuss USE flags in the
> context of vim (and other console text editors) in the install docs. 

Seems like the best place, since people don't seem to be reading the
Gentoo "USE Variable Guide".

> The install docs are the only docs that we really know almost all of our
> users actually read,

I'd say "some" users <tongue firmly in cheek>

>  so a brief primer about USE flags would be quite
> useful there, and vim is a good package to talk about since the absence
> or presence of X in USE makes a huge and obvious difference to the build
> process, which helps drive home the point about how customizable Gentoo
> is.

Agreed, an excellent example.

-- 
Troy Dack					http://linux.tkdack.com
<tad@gentoo.org>				http://webportage.sf.net

Public Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x4D90BE3C
Key fingerprint = 1F3D 6C15 16AA 09D5 0C96  92E5 FD89 16F9 4D90 BE3C


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] new local USE var: vim-with-x

[William Kenworthy]

Only to have the whole lot fall in a heap when an "emerge -u" writes
over the top of your carefully tailored USE flags.  USE flags as they
are currently implemented have a few shortcomings, and it looks like
from this discussion that per package overides will be the real
solution.  In the meantime, please dont build console apps with X
support by default!  If I want X support, I will run X and gvim.

BillK - one who has been bitten by silly USE defaults like X in console
applications ...

On Thu, 2003-05-01 at 11:25, Troy Dack wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-04-30 at 01:46, Grant Goodyear wrote:
...
> > I propose that we go ahead and have vim build with X support if people
> > don't override the +X useflag, since that's most inline with Gentoo
> > philosophy.
> 
> Hear, Hear!!  That is the whole point of USE flags!



--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list