[gentoo-dev] RFC: split tcltk USE flag to tcl and tk

[gentoo-dev] RFC: split tcltk USE flag to tcl and tk

[Robin H. Johnson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 891 bytes --]

I'd like comments on splitting the tcltk USE flag into 'tcl' and 'tk'
USE flags.

My primary motivation for this is that I am putting together many more
servers lately, and I need tcl on them, but I don't want X there.
doing 'USE=tcltk emerge python' pulls in xfree due to 
tcltk? ( ...tk... ) in the python ebuild.

Advantages:
1. More accurately reflects what a package uses, and allows for better
customization.

Disadvantages:
2. Changing existing ebuilds to the new style
3. Users with tcltk have to update their USE flags.

I am more than willing to bear the brunt of the work of updating the
ebuilds if there are no objections to this.

-- 
Robin Hugh Johnson
E-Mail     : robbat2@orbis-terrarum.net
Home Page  : http://www.orbis-terrarum.net/?l=people.robbat2
ICQ#       : 30269588 or 41961639
GnuPG FP   : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED  F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 232 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: split tcltk USE flag to tcl and tk

[Jon Portnoy]

On Sun, Aug 17, 2003 at 12:55:37AM -0700, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> I'd like comments on splitting the tcltk USE flag into 'tcl' and 'tk'
> USE flags.
> 

Absolutely agreed - this has been a serious pain in my rear end when 
writing ebuilds in the past.

-- 
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: split tcltk USE flag to tcl and tk

[Seemant Kulleen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 771 bytes --]

This has come up before, and I still wish to voice against it.  Like I
said to Mike (vapier/spanky) in a previous post, and what msterret and I
are working on fixing through the tree is:

tcltk? ( X? ( blah ) )

which is more accurate.  By separating them you run into this error
case:

USE="-tcl tk"

except that tk needs tcl.  And once upon a time they actually were
separate.  I put them together because every ebuild that had a tk dep in
it was doing:

tcl? ( tcl ) tk? ( tk )

which is just silly really.

My 2 cents,


-- 
Seemant Kulleen
Developer and Project Co-ordinator,
Gentoo Linux					http://dev.gentoo.org/~seemant

Public Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x3458780E
Key fingerprint = 23A9 7CB5 9BBB 4F8D 549B 6593 EDA2 65D8 3458 780E

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: split tcltk USE flag to tcl and tk

[Tony Clark]

On Sunday 17 August 2003 09.55, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> I'd like comments on splitting the tcltk USE flag into 'tcl' and 'tk'
> USE flags.
>
> My primary motivation for this is that I am putting together many more
> servers lately, and I need tcl on them, but I don't want X there.
> doing 'USE=tcltk emerge python' pulls in xfree due to
> tcltk? ( ...tk... ) in the python ebuild.
>
> Advantages:
> 1. More accurately reflects what a package uses, and allows for better
> customization.
>
> Disadvantages:
> 2. Changing existing ebuilds to the new style
> 3. Users with tcltk have to update their USE flags.
>
> I am more than willing to bear the brunt of the work of updating the
> ebuilds if there are no objections to this.
Wouldn't it be nicer to use overloading on use flags, so that -X took 
priority.  ie if -X never build X aware options of any packages.

/tony
-- 
Contract ASIC and FPGA design.
Telephone +46 702 894 667
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0x633E2623



--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: split tcltk USE flag to tcl and tk

[Robin H. Johnson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1231 bytes --]

On Sun, Aug 17, 2003 at 01:08:33AM -0700, Seemant Kulleen wrote:
> This has come up before, and I still wish to voice against it.  Like I
> said to Mike (vapier/spanky) in a previous post, and what msterret and I
> are working on fixing through the tree is:
> 
> tcltk? ( X? ( blah ) )
> 
> which is more accurate.  By separating them you run into this error
> case:
> 
> USE="-tcl tk"
> 
> except that tk needs tcl.  And once upon a time they actually were
> separate.  I put them together because every ebuild that had a tk dep in
> it was doing:
> 
> tcl? ( tcl ) tk? ( tk )
> 
> which is just silly really.
> 
> My 2 cents,

Two possible solutions for this:
1. Have the 'tk' USE flag imply the 'tcl' USE flag. This would cause the
'tcl? ( tcl ) tk? ( tk )' example to resolve correctly.
2. the ebuilds doing 'tcl? ( tcl ) tk? ( tk )' are quite clearly wrong,
as tk is the graphical toolkit for tcl, ergo they should have
'IUSE="tk"' and that would pull in tcl as well.

-- 
Robin Hugh Johnson
E-Mail     : robbat2@orbis-terrarum.net
Home Page  : http://www.orbis-terrarum.net/?l=people.robbat2
ICQ#       : 30269588 or 41961639
GnuPG FP   : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED  F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 232 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: split tcltk USE flag to tcl and tk

[Spider]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 915 bytes --]

begin  quote
On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 01:32:28 -0700
"Robin H. Johnson" <robbat2@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
> Two possible solutions for this:
> 1. Have the 'tk' USE flag imply the 'tcl' USE flag. This would cause
> the'tcl? ( tcl ) tk? ( tk )' example to resolve correctly.
> 2. the ebuilds doing 'tcl? ( tcl ) tk? ( tk )' are quite clearly
> wrong, as tk is the graphical toolkit for tcl, ergo they should have
> 'IUSE="tk"' and that would pull in tcl as wel


We have that with gtk and gtk2, and users don't understand it. We are at
about 1 bug report / week for that due to the nesting (one turn on/off
and one prefer-gtk2) 

I'd still prefer that the python ebuild was fixed to be:
DEPEND="tcltk? ( X? ( >=dev-lang/tk-8.4 )) " instead of breaking it
further.


//Spider




-- 
begin  .signature
This is a .signature virus! Please copy me into your .signature!
See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information.
end

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: split tcltk USE flag to tcl and tk

[Luke-Jr]

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

Unless there are Tcl-specific features for an app, why depend on it at all? Tk 
depends on Tcl, that's fine. Let Tk's dependency pull it in. Why do Tk-based 
programs need to be aware of what Tk depends on?

On Sunday 17 August 2003 08:08 am, Seemant Kulleen wrote:
> This has come up before, and I still wish to voice against it.  Like I
> said to Mike (vapier/spanky) in a previous post, and what msterret and I
> are working on fixing through the tree is:
>
> tcltk? ( X? ( blah ) )
>
> which is more accurate.  By separating them you run into this error
> case:
>
> USE="-tcl tk"
>
> except that tk needs tcl.  And once upon a time they actually were
> separate.  I put them together because every ebuild that had a tk dep in
> it was doing:
>
> tcl? ( tcl ) tk? ( tk )
>
> which is just silly really.
>
> My 2 cents,

- -- 
Luke-Jr
Developer, Gentoo Linux
http://www.gentoo.org/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/P4fMZl/BHdU+lYMRAiReAJ0QXftG0tEcgjNuHNmkDQrhQuShrQCeN8YO
DGkQ8lpQjTYkyPiHsrJuL0g=
=Iy+F
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: split tcltk USE flag to tcl and tk

[George Shapovalov]

On Sunday 17 August 2003 01:32, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> Two possible solutions for this:
> 1. Have the 'tk' USE flag imply the 'tcl' USE flag. This would cause the
> 'tcl? ( tcl ) tk? ( tk )' example to resolve correctly.
Perhaps then it should be called tcltk ;). Thus looks like just maintaining 
tcltk flag and adding plain "tcl" for the cases where tk is not needed or 
desired should resolve this..

George



--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: split tcltk USE flag to tcl and tk

[Georgi Georgiev]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 667 bytes --]

On 17/08/2003 at 15:15:26(+0200), Spider used 1.3K just to say:
> I'd still prefer that the python ebuild was fixed to be:
> DEPEND="tcltk? ( X? ( >=dev-lang/tk-8.4 )) " instead of breaking it
> further.

Don't forget the kernel.eclass

It currently says:

# This also causes kernels to pull X when it shouldn't...
#              tcltk? dev-lang/tk

-- 
(*   Georgi Georgiev   (* The time spent on any item of the agenda [of (*
*)    chutz@gg3.net    *) a finance committee] will be in inverse      *)
(*  +81(90)6266-1163   (* proportion to the sum involved. -- C.N.      (*
*) ------------------- *) Parkinson                                    *)

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: split tcltk USE flag to tcl and tk

[Georgi Georgiev]

On 17/08/2003 at 15:15:26(+0200), Spider used 1.3K just to say:
> begin  quote
> On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 01:32:28 -0700
> "Robin H. Johnson" <robbat2@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > 
> > Two possible solutions for this:
> > 1. Have the 'tk' USE flag imply the 'tcl' USE flag. This would cause
> > the'tcl? ( tcl ) tk? ( tk )' example to resolve correctly.
> > 2. the ebuilds doing 'tcl? ( tcl ) tk? ( tk )' are quite clearly
> > wrong, as tk is the graphical toolkit for tcl, ergo they should have
> > 'IUSE="tk"' and that would pull in tcl as wel
> 
> 
> We have that with gtk and gtk2, and users don't understand it. We are at
> about 1 bug report / week for that due to the nesting (one turn on/off
> and one prefer-gtk2) 
> 
> I'd still prefer that the python ebuild was fixed to be:
> DEPEND="tcltk? ( X? ( >=dev-lang/tk-8.4 )) " instead of breaking it

Is there a way to do something similar in SRC_URI?

I am thinking about something like

SRC_URI="ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/releases/${PN}${MY_PV2}/src/${PN}-source-${MY_PV2}.tar.bz2
    crypt? ( -moznomail? ( http://downloads.mozdev.org/enigmail/src/enigmail-${EMVER}.tar.gz
                 http://enigmail.mozdev.org/dload/src/ipc-${IPCVER}.tar.gz ) )"

Currently the above does not work :(

-- 
(    Georgi Georgiev   (  Spock: We suffered 23 casualties in that     (
 )    chutz@gg3.net     ) attack, Captain.                              )
(   +81(90)6266-1163   (                                               (

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list