[gentoo-dev] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[gentoo-dev] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[Aaron Walker]

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

ciaranm brought this up a while back[1], and from what I can tell it doesn't
look like a consensus was ever reached.

I'm working on a profile module for the top-sekrit eclectic project (formerly
known as eselect) and have run into the problem of not being able to provide a
list of valid profiles.

'find $(portageq portdir)/profiles -type d' was suggested but that would also
have base/ and updates/ in the list.

Can we finish this discussion and get something implemented?

[1] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=gentoo-dev&m=110201593924411&w=2

- --
I am a man: nothing human is alien to me.
		-- Publius Terentius Afer (Terence)
me

Aaron Walker <ka0ttic@gentoo.org>
[ BSD | cron | forensics | shell-tools | commonbox | netmon | vim | web-apps ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCIkhHC3poscuANHARAlm1AJ9boz8b0kRLtAjbuGyfhAlJXGM7mACdHqSh
11loEnE+p+gg8INU4EWviNU=
=V5OI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[Aaron Walker]

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

Aaron Walker wrote:
> ciaranm brought this up a while back[1], and from what I can tell it doesn't
> look like a consensus was ever reached.
> 
> I'm working on a profile module for the top-sekrit eclectic project (formerly
> known as eselect) and have run into the problem of not being able to provide a
> list of valid profiles.
> 
> 'find $(portageq portdir)/profiles -type d' was suggested but that would also
> have base/ and updates/ in the list.
> 
> Can we finish this discussion and get something implemented?
> 
> [1] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=gentoo-dev&m=110201593924411&w=2
> 

hmmm... maybe I should've thrown in some stereotypes...

- --
I brought my BOWLING BALL -- and some DRUGS!!

Aaron Walker <ka0ttic@gentoo.org>
[ BSD | cron | forensics | shell-tools | commonbox | netmon | vim | web-apps ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCJEIVC3poscuANHARAqqMAJ9hb9pmgPR9Tl2JLGt8JJZPKZj2AgCfZMcY
d4PQjyFJ8ap1cRCBWVlN/bg=
=2Qf8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 879 bytes --]

On Tue, 2005-03-01 at 05:21 -0500, Aaron Walker wrote:
> > I'm working on a profile module for the top-sekrit eclectic project (formerly
> > known as eselect) and have run into the problem of not being able to provide a
> > list of valid profiles.
> > 
> > 'find $(portageq portdir)/profiles -type d' was suggested but that would also
> > have base/ and updates/ in the list.
> > 
> > Can we finish this discussion and get something implemented?
> > 
> > [1] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=gentoo-dev&m=110201593924411&w=2
> > 
> 
> hmmm... maybe I should've thrown in some stereotypes...

How about we add a /usr/portage/profiles/profiles, in the same vein as
categories?  That should be simple enough and allow us to specify
"valid" profiles for use.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead/QA Manager
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[Aaron Walker]

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

Chris Gianelloni wrote:

> How about we add a /usr/portage/profiles/profiles, in the same vein as
> categories?  That should be simple enough and allow us to specify
> "valid" profiles for use.

I think I like this idea better.  It won't add lots of empty files to
profiles/.  And it's as easy as a $(< ${portdir}/profiles/profiles).

- --
To say you got a vote of confidence would be to say you needed a vote of
confidence.
		-- Andrew Young

Aaron Walker <ka0ttic@gentoo.org>
[ BSD | cron | forensics | shell-tools | commonbox | netmon | vim | web-apps ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCJIU1C3poscuANHARAv8OAKDhS+TdI8uPHD7D3l4s+TjeL3yUQACg3RZ/
I3rhb0t86bEDq4FfoRQG7Vw=
=6hiE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 824 bytes --]

On Tue, 2005-03-01 at 10:07 -0500, Aaron Walker wrote:
> > How about we add a /usr/portage/profiles/profiles, in the same vein as
> > categories?  That should be simple enough and allow us to specify
> > "valid" profiles for use.
> 
> I think I like this idea better.  It won't add lots of empty files to
> profiles/.  And it's as easy as a $(< ${portdir}/profiles/profiles).

Well, since nobody objected, I'm going to add this to portage after the
release.  I'm probably only going to fill it with the profiles that I am
sure are usable, so if I miss something, just add it.  I figure it'll be
easy enough to add this support to portage and we might as well get the
ball rolling by populating the file.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead/QA Manager
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[Mike Frysinger]

On Monday 07 March 2005 01:42 pm, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> Well, since nobody objected, I'm going to add this to portage after the
> release.  I'm probably only going to fill it with the profiles that I am
> sure are usable, so if I miss something, just add it.  I figure it'll be
> easy enough to add this support to portage and we might as well get the
> ball rolling by populating the file.

i objected on irc, does that count ? :)

why add another file when we already have one (profiles.desc) ?  
unfortunately, repoman will only respect the last entry for each arch, but 
maybe in the future it'll suck less and check all of them ...
-mike
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[Aaron Walker]

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

Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Monday 07 March 2005 01:42 pm, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> 
>>Well, since nobody objected, I'm going to add this to portage after the
>>release.  I'm probably only going to fill it with the profiles that I am
>>sure are usable, so if I miss something, just add it.  I figure it'll be
>>easy enough to add this support to portage and we might as well get the
>>ball rolling by populating the file.
> 
> 
> i objected on irc, does that count ? :)
> 
> why add another file when we already have one (profiles.desc) ?  
> unfortunately, repoman will only respect the last entry for each arch, but 
> maybe in the future it'll suck less and check all of them ...
> -mike

Isn't profiles.desc just a list of *default* profiles though?  We want a list
of all valid profiles.  So I think we should either extend profiles.desc to
contain all valid profiles, or add a new file.

Looking at profiles.desc did make me realize something though.  If we do
decided to do a separate file, I think we should list the arch as well along
side the profile, kind of like profiles.desc does.  This would allow us to get
a list of all valid profiles for a certain arch.

In the case that I need this for (the eclectic profiles module), it'd be much
better IMO to be able to show valid profiles for a certain arch since a valid
profile for sparc is obviously not a valid profile for x86.

Having a format of something like:

alpha	default-linux/alpha/2004.3
alpha	default-linux/alpha/2005.0
...
x86	default-linux/x86/2004.3
...

would be ideal IMO.

comments?
- --
Yow!

Aaron Walker <ka0ttic@gentoo.org>
[ BSD | cron | forensics | shell-tools | commonbox | netmon | vim | web-apps ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCLoIDC3poscuANHARAlfEAJ0f5mbRJb8NnXILKiYfc5xMbbt7agCeJT2F
02McRAEWL3vEaV+ATPG3VK0=
=zsyD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1264 bytes --]

On Tue, 2005-03-08 at 23:56 -0500, Aaron Walker wrote:
> Isn't profiles.desc just a list of *default* profiles though?  We want a list
> of all valid profiles.  So I think we should either extend profiles.desc to
> contain all valid profiles, or add a new file.

Either way would be fine by me, but portage would have to be modified to
allow for multiple profiles to be listed per arch in profiles.desc

> Looking at profiles.desc did make me realize something though.  If we do
> decided to do a separate file, I think we should list the arch as well along
> side the profile, kind of like profiles.desc does.  This would allow us to get
> a list of all valid profiles for a certain arch.
> 
> In the case that I need this for (the eclectic profiles module), it'd be much
> better IMO to be able to show valid profiles for a certain arch since a valid
> profile for sparc is obviously not a valid profile for x86.
> 
> Having a format of something like:
> 
> alpha	default-linux/alpha/2004.3
> alpha	default-linux/alpha/2005.0
> ...
> x86	default-linux/x86/2004.3
> ...
> 
> would be ideal IMO.
> 
> comments?

WORKSFORME

;]
-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead/QA Manager
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[Jason Stubbs]

On Thursday 10 March 2005 01:46, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-03-08 at 23:56 -0500, Aaron Walker wrote:
> > Isn't profiles.desc just a list of *default* profiles though?  We want a
> > list of all valid profiles.  So I think we should either extend
> > profiles.desc to contain all valid profiles, or add a new file.
>
> Either way would be fine by me, but portage would have to be modified to
> allow for multiple profiles to be listed per arch in profiles.desc

It won't break anything if that's what you're worried about. The only thing 
that uses profiles.desc is repoman, which can "handle" multiple profiles 
listed. ... I just found that all duplicates have been removed from 
profiles.desc. I guess people don't like noise. ;)

Okay. For the time being, there's a two things that can be done with repoman. 
It could print out a table of the profiles it will use for scanning or add 
the profile that was checked against into the arch-based failure message. 
What do you think?

Regards,
Jason Stubbs
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[Mike Frysinger]

On Wednesday 09 March 2005 06:57 pm, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> Okay. For the time being, there's a two things that can be done with
> repoman. It could print out a table of the profiles it will use for
> scanning or add the profile that was checked against into the arch-based
> failure message. What do you think?

i vote for #2
-mike
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[Mike Frysinger]

On Tuesday 08 March 2005 11:56 pm, Aaron Walker wrote:
> Isn't profiles.desc just a list of *default* profiles though?  We want a
> list of all valid profiles.  So I think we should either extend
> profiles.desc to contain all valid profiles, or add a new file.

no one has ever defined what profiles.desc is for ... we only go by what 
portage people do with it ;)

if repoman stops complaining about multiple profiles then i dont see the point 
of spawning a new one since it's no diff than using the current one
-mike
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[Jerome Brown]

Aaron Walker wrote:
<snip>
> In the case that I need this for (the eclectic profiles module), it'd be much
> better IMO to be able to show valid profiles for a certain arch since a valid
> profile for sparc is obviously not a valid profile for x86.
> 
> Having a format of something like:
> 
> alpha	default-linux/alpha/2004.3
> alpha	default-linux/alpha/2005.0
> ...
> x86	default-linux/x86/2004.3
> ...
> 
> would be ideal IMO.
> 
> comments?

Is there a need for a seperate column? Would it not be eaiser to parse
the profile name to extract that information. This would then allow you
to search for all profiles that are valid for eg x86 BSD or alpha linux.
Are there any situations where the arch and/or OS are not in the profile
path? From a quick glance the non-default profiles (hardened, uclibc,
embedded etc) do not specify a -linux in the profile which would mean
either dropping the OS query, putting an OS column in or changing the
profiles (which has the advantage of making them more consistant).

-- 
Jerome Brown
Technology Architect
Hub.Net

P: +64  3 961-5116
M: +64 29 453 7663
F: +64  3 961-5129
E: jerome@hub.net.nz
W: http://www.hub.net.nz/
O: Level 4, 818 Colombo St, Christchurch, New Zealand
S: PO Box 1879, Christchurch, New Zealand
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[Aaron Walker]

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

Jerome Brown wrote:
> Aaron Walker wrote:
> <snip>
> 
>>In the case that I need this for (the eclectic profiles module), it'd be much
>>better IMO to be able to show valid profiles for a certain arch since a valid
>>profile for sparc is obviously not a valid profile for x86.
>>
>>Having a format of something like:
>>
>>alpha	default-linux/alpha/2004.3
>>alpha	default-linux/alpha/2005.0
>>...
>>x86	default-linux/x86/2004.3
>>...
>>
>>would be ideal IMO.
>>
>>comments?
> 
> 
> Is there a need for a seperate column? Would it not be eaiser to parse
> the profile name to extract that information. This would then allow you
> to search for all profiles that are valid for eg x86 BSD or alpha linux.
> Are there any situations where the arch and/or OS are not in the profile
> path? From a quick glance the non-default profiles (hardened, uclibc,
> embedded etc) do not specify a -linux in the profile which would mean
> either dropping the OS query, putting an OS column in or changing the
> profiles (which has the advantage of making them more consistant).
> 

There might be more, but the one I can think of off the top of my head is the
one for fbsd (keyword x86-fbsd) which is default-bsd/fbsd/x86.

I really wouldn't want to have to deal with special cases when you can just do
a simple sed call searching for lines beginning with $(portageq envvar ARCH).

- --
Slooly und soorely zee uneex crept up oon zee Neentendu user ...
Bork Bork Bork!

Aaron Walker <ka0ttic@gentoo.org>
[ BSD | cron | forensics | shell-tools | commonbox | netmon | vim | web-apps ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCMEPkC3poscuANHARAscEAKDfJbtd/3gWNm9zKDwiV3IvbWmC9gCgiQcH
K5hqpeh77yrTFUw0vrYE0z8=
=RNdS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1554 bytes --]

On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 14:41 +1300, Jerome Brown wrote:
> Is there a need for a seperate column? Would it not be eaiser to parse
> the profile name to extract that information. This would then allow you
> to search for all profiles that are valid for eg x86 BSD or alpha linux.
> Are there any situations where the arch and/or OS are not in the profile
> path? From a quick glance the non-default profiles (hardened, uclibc,
> embedded etc) do not specify a -linux in the profile which would mean
> either dropping the OS query, putting an OS column in or changing the
> profiles (which has the advantage of making them more consistant).

Personally, I would like seeing a profile structure similar to this:

$type/$os/$arch/$ver/$sub

Where:

$type is default, hardened, uclibc, etc
$os is linux, macos, bsd, etc
$arch is the architecture
$ver is the version the profile goes with and would be optional for
non-released projects/arches
$sub is any sub-profiles

This would require minor changes to a few profiles and would make things
pretty easy to maintain in the future.  It also gives a consistent
hierarchy that should meet any needs we have.

The only issue would be the temporary need to keep all of the older
profiles around until they were all deprecated and could be removed.

I would be willing to make these changes post-2005.0, as I don't think
anyone would let me live if we did another rebuild... ;]

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead/QA Manager
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[Ciaran McCreesh]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 484 bytes --]

On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 10:49:05 -0500 Chris Gianelloni
<wolf31o2@gentoo.org> wrote:
| Personally, I would like seeing a profile structure similar to this:
| 
| $type/$os/$arch/$ver/$sub

I'd like multiple inheritance in profiles too, or at least some kind of
mixin style semi-multiple inheritance.

Also, a pony.

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Fluxbox, shell tools)
Mail            : ciaranm at gentoo.org
Web             : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm


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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 908 bytes --]

On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 15:53 +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> | Personally, I would like seeing a profile structure similar to this:
> | 
> | $type/$os/$arch/$ver/$sub
> 
> I'd like multiple inheritance in profiles too, or at least some kind of
> mixin style semi-multiple inheritance.

Actually, that would be very useful.  Be able to do things like have
both ".." and "../2004.3" in parent, so items from the parent in the
directory structure is read first, followed by the 2004.3 stuff.  There
are quite a few cascaded profiles that are nearly identical between
versions, with only a single change, but that are quite divergent from
the parent.  This would eliminate most of the duplication and redundancy
in them.

> Also, a pony.

How about a Great Dane that thinks he's a pony?

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead/QA Manager
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[Lina Pezzella]

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


On Mar 10, 2005, at 10:53 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:

> On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 10:49:05 -0500 Chris Gianelloni
> <wolf31o2@gentoo.org> wrote:
> | Personally, I would like seeing a profile structure similar to this:
> |
> | $type/$os/$arch/$ver/$sub
>
> I'd like multiple inheritance in profiles too, or at least some kind of
> mixin style semi-multiple inheritance.
>

Amen! If we had multiple inheritance in there, ppc-macos would 
definitely use it.

> Also, a pony.
>
> -- 
> Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Fluxbox, shell tools)
> Mail            : ciaranm at gentoo.org
> Web             : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm
>
>
Lina Pezzella
Ebuild/Porting Co-Lead
Gentoo for Mac OS X
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFCMHwdNJ9STR9DbYERAsBCAKDB/4p2ptp7VFC4wjSG9UuGACZNuwCePYwa
WXskOkjRVlKo8JuQy6iMbkw=
=bi3a
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[Jerome Brown]

Chris Gianelloni wrote:
>>I'd like multiple inheritance in profiles too, or at least some kind of
>>mixin style semi-multiple inheritance.
> 
> 
> Actually, that would be very useful.  Be able to do things like have
> both ".." and "../2004.3" in parent, so items from the parent in the
> directory structure is read first, followed by the 2004.3 stuff.  There
> are quite a few cascaded profiles that are nearly identical between
> versions, with only a single change, but that are quite divergent from
> the parent.  This would eliminate most of the duplication and redundancy
> in them.

Wont this cause headaches when it comes to depreciating profiles
however? If there are very few changes between versions, I can forsee a
time where someone wants to keep 2004.3, 2005.0, 2005.1, 2006.0, 2006.1,
2007.0, 2007.1 around because 2008.0 inherits from 2007.1 which inherits
from ... (you get the idea). How would this work and how long would you
be willing to keep a profile around for until it is removed and not just
depreciated?

(I do think that multiple inheritance is A Good Thing (TM), especially
if it becomes possible to have user defined profiles in
/etc/portage/profiles which can inherit from multiple 'base' profiles)

-- 
Jerome Brown
Technology Architect
Hub.Net

P: +64  3 961-5116
M: +64 29 453 7663
F: +64  3 961-5129
E: jerome@hub.net.nz
W: http://www.hub.net.nz/
O: Level 4, 818 Colombo St, Christchurch, New Zealand
S: PO Box 1879, Christchurch, New Zealand
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1355 bytes --]

On Mon, 2005-03-14 at 07:17 +1300, Jerome Brown wrote:
> Wont this cause headaches when it comes to depreciating profiles
> however? If there are very few changes between versions, I can forsee a
> time where someone wants to keep 2004.3, 2005.0, 2005.1, 2006.0, 2006.1,
> 2007.0, 2007.1 around because 2008.0 inherits from 2007.1 which inherits
> from ... (you get the idea). How would this work and how long would you
> be willing to keep a profile around for until it is removed and not just
> depreciated?

Well, we would need to have enough sense to migrate data when we
deprecate.  Once we deprecate 2004.3, we would copy the 2004.3 stuff to
2005.0 and break the inheritance on 2004.3 from 2005.0 and so on.

As for deprecation, I think we currently have a loose rule of 6 months
after deprecation for the profile removal.

> (I do think that multiple inheritance is A Good Thing (TM), especially
> if it becomes possible to have user defined profiles in
> /etc/portage/profiles which can inherit from multiple 'base' profiles)

The only real problem with user-provided profiles is the simplicity with
which a user could completely hose their system and our complete lack of
ability to troubleshoot problems with them.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead/QA Manager
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[Martin Schlemmer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1116 bytes --]

On Sun, 2005-03-13 at 15:19 -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-03-14 at 07:17 +1300, Jerome Brown wrote:
> > Wont this cause headaches when it comes to depreciating profiles
> > however? If there are very few changes between versions, I can forsee a
> > time where someone wants to keep 2004.3, 2005.0, 2005.1, 2006.0, 2006.1,
> > 2007.0, 2007.1 around because 2008.0 inherits from 2007.1 which inherits
> > from ... (you get the idea). How would this work and how long would you
> > be willing to keep a profile around for until it is removed and not just
> > depreciated?
> 
> Well, we would need to have enough sense to migrate data when we
> deprecate.  Once we deprecate 2004.3, we would copy the 2004.3 stuff to
> 2005.0 and break the inheritance on 2004.3 from 2005.0 and so on.
> 
> As for deprecation, I think we currently have a loose rule of 6 months
> after deprecation for the profile removal.
> 

How about plan B:  Do not make sub profiles depend on each other?


-- 
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] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[Mike Frysinger]

On Sunday 13 March 2005 05:05 pm, Martin Schlemmer wrote:
> How about plan B:  Do not make sub profiles depend on each other?

or plan B.2: dont be stupid when laying out the cascading profiles
-mike
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[Aaron Walker]

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

Aaron Walker wrote:
> ciaranm brought this up a while back[1], and from what I can tell it doesn't
> look like a consensus was ever reached.
> 
> I'm working on a profile module for the top-sekrit eclectic project (formerly
> known as eselect) and have run into the problem of not being able to provide a
> list of valid profiles.
> 
> 'find $(portageq portdir)/profiles -type d' was suggested but that would also
> have base/ and updates/ in the list.
> 
> Can we finish this discussion and get something implemented?
> 
> [1] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=gentoo-dev&m=110201593924411&w=2
> 

Now that 2005.0 has been released, what's the status of this?  Did we agree on
a format?

- --
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

- --
Zee oopussoom is a fery supheesticeted uneemel.  It duesn't ifee get up
unteel 5 oor 6 PM.
Bork Bork Bork!

Aaron Walker <ka0ttic@gentoo.org>
[ BSD | cron | forensics | shell-tools | commonbox | netmon | vim | web-apps ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCSnEGC3poscuANHARAkEbAKCaeF9K6IWMuA8vkoleGmj5T8O4KQCdGol5
zaF2Ic2/nvq73VtOwiu98Zk=
=+Y87
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 298 bytes --]

On Wed, 2005-03-30 at 04:27 -0500, Aaron Walker wrote:
> Now that 2005.0 has been released, what's the status of this?  Did we agree on
> a format?

No.  A format was never agreed upon.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead/QA Manager
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[Aaron Walker]

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

Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-03-30 at 04:27 -0500, Aaron Walker wrote:
> 
>>Now that 2005.0 has been released, what's the status of this?  Did we agree on
>>a format?
> 
> 
> No.  A format was never agreed upon.
> 

Let's.  Unless I'm mistaken I'm the only one who really proposed a format.

alpha	default-linux/alpha/2004.3
alpha	default-linux/alpha/2005.0
...
x86	default-linux/x86/2004.3
...

No one raised any issues with this in the original post.
- --
Bork Bork Bork!

Aaron Walker <ka0ttic@gentoo.org>
[ BSD | cron | forensics | shell-tools | commonbox | netmon | vim | web-apps ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCTZgAC3poscuANHARAjeeAJ0WMaCNpEtGUv2xa/LNMWEEv/gaGwCfX13I
ysp80RKLkwd2hlm3rvAadHQ=
=V2Px
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[Mike Frysinger]

On Friday 01 April 2005 01:50 pm, Aaron Walker wrote:
> Let's.  Unless I'm mistaken I'm the only one who really proposed a format.
> <snip>
> No one raised any issues with this in the original post.

i remember complaining that using anything other than profiles.desc would be 
(1) cruft (2) just another file for people to be aware of (3) require arch 
maintainers to update it (4) pita (5) i like to touch myself at nite
-mike
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 487 bytes --]

On Fri, 2005-04-01 at 14:31 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> i remember complaining that using anything other than profiles.desc would be 
> (1) cruft (2) just another file for people to be aware of (3) require arch 
> maintainers to update it (4) pita (5) i like to touch myself at nite

Right.

Will it break anything to have multiple profiles per arch in
profiles.desc?

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead/QA Manager
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[Mike Frysinger]

On Friday 01 April 2005 02:46 pm, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-04-01 at 14:31 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > i remember complaining that using anything other than profiles.desc would
> > be (1) cruft (2) just another file for people to be aware of (3) require
> > arch maintainers to update it (4) pita (5) i like to touch myself at nite
>
> Right.
>
> Will it break anything to have multiple profiles per arch in
> profiles.desc?

no, but repoman will print a warning per duplicated profile ... we can just 
make portage team change this behavior though :)
-mike
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[Aaron Walker]

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

Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Friday 01 April 2005 02:46 pm, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> 
>>On Fri, 2005-04-01 at 14:31 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>
>>>i remember complaining that using anything other than profiles.desc would
>>>be (1) cruft (2) just another file for people to be aware of (3) require
>>>arch maintainers to update it (4) pita (5) i like to touch myself at nite
>>
>>Right.
>>
>>Will it break anything to have multiple profiles per arch in
>>profiles.desc?
> 
> 
> no, but repoman will print a warning per duplicated profile ... we can just 
> make portage team change this behavior though :)
> -mike

Sounds good to me.  portage guys?

- --
"Leeffe-a is a germent ve-a cunteenoouoosly elter, boot vheech nefer seems tu
feet."
- -- Defeed McCurd

Aaron Walker <ka0ttic@gentoo.org>
[ BSD | cron | forensics | shell-tools | commonbox | netmon | vim | web-apps ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCTjiOC3poscuANHARAueKAJ9hCOh8VveWBEZcWFK+1cV9x3aPNgCeMBsZ
2F5B9Nrg1ponz/ajDqZoB6M=
=5Voo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[Jason Stubbs]

On Saturday 02 April 2005 15:15, Aaron Walker wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Friday 01 April 2005 02:46 pm, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> >>On Fri, 2005-04-01 at 14:31 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> >>>i remember complaining that using anything other than profiles.desc
> >>> would be (1) cruft (2) just another file for people to be aware of (3)
> >>> require arch maintainers to update it (4) pita (5) i like to touch
> >>> myself at nite
> >>
> >>Right.
> >>
> >>Will it break anything to have multiple profiles per arch in
> >>profiles.desc?
> >
> > no, but repoman will print a warning per duplicated profile ... we can
> > just make portage team change this behavior though :)
>
> Sounds good to me.  portage guys?

Seeing that I added that output, I guess I should reply. The reason for it was 
that only one profile per keyword will be checked at the moment. Essentially, 
the output was both to make people aware of this fact and to make sure people 
know *which* profile is being checked.

I figure your going to tell me that all listed profiles should be checked and 
I'd have to agree so, if it'll prevent the addition of another useless file, 
I guess I'll get right on it.

Regards,
Jason Stubbs
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 780 bytes --]

On Sat, 2005-04-02 at 16:35 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> Seeing that I added that output, I guess I should reply. The reason for it was 
> that only one profile per keyword will be checked at the moment. Essentially, 
> the output was both to make people aware of this fact and to make sure people 
> know *which* profile is being checked.
> 
> I figure your going to tell me that all listed profiles should be checked and 
> I'd have to agree so, if it'll prevent the addition of another useless file, 
> I guess I'll get right on it.

jstubbs++

Give us a shout when you have something to test and I'll gladly fill up
profiles.desc with the valid profiles.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead/QA Manager
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[Daniel Ostrow]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 971 bytes --]

On Sat, 2005-04-02 at 11:41 -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Sat, 2005-04-02 at 16:35 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> > Seeing that I added that output, I guess I should reply. The reason for it was 
> > that only one profile per keyword will be checked at the moment. Essentially, 
> > the output was both to make people aware of this fact and to make sure people 
> > know *which* profile is being checked.
> > 
> > I figure your going to tell me that all listed profiles should be checked and 
> > I'd have to agree so, if it'll prevent the addition of another useless file, 
> > I guess I'll get right on it.
> 
> jstubbs++
> 
> Give us a shout when you have something to test and I'll gladly fill up
> profiles.desc with the valid profiles.
> 

jstubbs++ indeed

I'm going to be making at least 2 dev profiles over the next week for
ppc64, glad that will be able to be checked.

jstubbs++ again.

Let us know when you need testers.

--Dan

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Identifying inherit-only / usable profiles (round 2)

[Jason Stubbs]

On Sunday 03 April 2005 01:51, Daniel Ostrow wrote:
> On Sat, 2005-04-02 at 11:41 -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> > On Sat, 2005-04-02 at 16:35 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> > > Seeing that I added that output, I guess I should reply. The reason for
> > > it was that only one profile per keyword will be checked at the moment.
> > > Essentially, the output was both to make people aware of this fact and
> > > to make sure people know *which* profile is being checked.
> > >
> > > I figure your going to tell me that all listed profiles should be
> > > checked and I'd have to agree so, if it'll prevent the addition of
> > > another useless file, I guess I'll get right on it.
> >
> > Give us a shout when you have something to test and I'll gladly fill up
> > profiles.desc with the valid profiles.
>
> I'm going to be making at least 2 dev profiles over the next week for
> ppc64, glad that will be able to be checked.
>
> Let us know when you need testers.

http://dev.gentoo.org/~jstubbs/repoman-2.0.51.19.patch

Changes:
* All profiles listed in profiles.desc are checked.
* Masked packages are not checked unless --include-masked is specified, when
  - repoman is being called at category or tree level, and
  - commit has not been specified.
* Removed several expensive but seemingly useless operation for a 90% speedup.

With regard to the useless operations, they were there to restore the trees 
and config objects to initial state but I can't find anything that actually 
modifies their states. I ran a couple of category checks with and without the 
patch and didn't get any differing results, but keep your eyes open anyway.

Regards,
Jason Stubbs
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list