[gentoo-dev] Interactive command

[gentoo-dev] Interactive command

[Kristian Benoit]

I'm trying to add a new command to ebuild (preconfig) for packages like
busybox that has to be configured prior to compile and that would be a
cannot really use USE as it probably have undreads of USE that does not
yet exist.

That new command would be called between src_unpack and src_compile and
only if FEATURES contain preconfig.

Anyway, the problem is when I run "make menuconfig" from src_preconfig,
I get a dumb terminal (I cannot send keys to the menuconfig, but it
works for vim):

pressing down prints "^[OB"
pressing up prints "^[OA"
the COLUMNS/LINES are unset...

So I wonder if there is a way to make interactive command work from an
ebuild. I know the config command should allow interactiveness.

Kristian 

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Interactive command

[Donnie Berkholz]

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

Kristian Benoit wrote:
> I'm trying to add a new command to ebuild (preconfig) for packages like
> busybox that has to be configured prior to compile and that would be a
> cannot really use USE as it probably have undreads of USE that does not
> yet exist.
> 
> That new command would be called between src_unpack and src_compile and
> only if FEATURES contain preconfig.

Seems to me that the recent discussion about src_configure() would
create something for this purpose as well. Until then, why not just keep
it in src_compile()?

BTW, it's not in good form to post to multiple lists where only
subscribers can respond.

Thanks,
Donnie
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFC1ahxXVaO67S1rtsRAnGlAKClZ+H4kW18bsnFeqTR3J93PpfG9wCgnDOb
Go3P9GtO8cIuvV7HOIGGFqk=
=zHGv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-embedded] Interactive command

[Ned Ludd]

On Wed, 2005-07-13 at 18:44 -0400, Kristian Benoit wrote:
> I'm trying to add a new command to ebuild (preconfig) for packages like
> busybox that has to be configured prior to compile and that would be a
> cannot really use USE as it probably have undreads of USE that does not
> yet exist.
> 
> That new command would be called between src_unpack and src_compile and
> only if FEATURES contain preconfig.

What you want already exists. Enable USE=savedconfig
Then add an /etc/busybox/busybox.config
Then merge busybox.

Have fun.


-- 
Ned Ludd <solar@gentoo.org>

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-embedded] Interactive command

[Kristian Benoit]

On Wed, 2005-07-13 at 20:02 -0400, Ned Ludd wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-07-13 at 18:44 -0400, Kristian Benoit wrote:
> > I'm trying to add a new command to ebuild (preconfig) for packages like
> > busybox that has to be configured prior to compile and that would be a
> > cannot really use USE as it probably have undreads of USE that does not
> > yet exist.
> > 
> > That new command would be called between src_unpack and src_compile and
> > only if FEATURES contain preconfig.
> 
> What you want already exists. Enable USE=savedconfig
> Then add an /etc/busybox/busybox.config
> Then merge busybox.

I know that this option exist, but I must either download busybox by
myself, make menuconfig by myself and copy it to the right location by
myself or ebuild unpack and do the rest by myself. It look pretty much
as a patch to me, cause portage cant handle packages that has to be user
configured before compile time.

What I want is "emerge busybox uclibc vanilla-sources nano". Should
unpack only the 3 first packages, show me busybox menuconfig, uclibc
menuconfig and vanilla-sources menuconfig and only then perform the rest
of the installation as usual (without re-unpacking the 3 packages). And
save the configs for futur use. So if my configs does not fit my need,
re-emerging busybox with USE=savedconfig should get me the busybox
menuconfig back using the previously configured ".config".

But anyway, the question is not whether the idea is good or not, but how
to get a menuconfig that works within ebuild.sh (called from spawn in
portage_exec ... called from the user with ebuild or emerge)?

Kristian

> Have fun.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Ned Ludd <solar@gentoo.org>
> 

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-embedded] Interactive command

[Patrick Lauer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1239 bytes --]

On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 01:13 -0400, Kristian Benoit wrote:
> What I want is "emerge busybox uclibc vanilla-sources nano". Should
> unpack only the 3 first packages, show me busybox menuconfig, uclibc
> menuconfig and vanilla-sources menuconfig and only then perform the rest
> of the installation as usual (without re-unpacking the 3 packages).
I really really hope that you want this to be a totally optional feature
that is never ever enabled by default.

When I run emerge -uD world on a server I don't accept any ebuild
waiting for interactive input. For stagebuilding and other activities
this behaviour is also unacceptable. 

>  And
> save the configs for futur use. So if my configs does not fit my need,
> re-emerging busybox with USE=savedconfig should get me the busybox
> menuconfig back using the previously configured ".config".
Patch the ebuilds with your .config

> But anyway, the question is not whether the idea is good or not, but how
> to get a menuconfig that works within ebuild.sh (called from spawn in
> portage_exec ... called from the user with ebuild or emerge)?
*shudder* I hope this stays limited to your overlay.

wkr,
Patrick
-- 
Stand still, and let the rest of the universe move

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-embedded] Interactive command

[Ned Ludd]

On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 01:13 -0400, Kristian Benoit wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-07-13 at 20:02 -0400, Ned Ludd wrote:
> > On Wed, 2005-07-13 at 18:44 -0400, Kristian Benoit wrote:
> > > I'm trying to add a new command to ebuild (preconfig) for packages like


> But anyway, the question is not whether the idea is good or not, but how
> to get a menuconfig that works within ebuild.sh (called from spawn in
> portage_exec ... called from the user with ebuild or emerge)?

Well portage is a non-interactive tool and it's staying that way.
For what you want you will need to edit the busybox/-sources/uClibc 
ebuild and manually add in a call to make menuconfig. 
Or add something like this untested example to your 
local /etc/portage/bashrc

if [[ $EBUILD_PHASE == compile ]]; then
 case "$PN" in
    busybox)
    uclibc)
    *-sources)
      echo "we are at the stage where portage has unpacked the "
      echo "ebuild and is getting ready to compile."
      echo "being that no portage dev in his/her right mind would ever"
      echo "allow interactive code in an ebuild we use bashrc tricks"
      echo "here to get what Kristian is after"
      /usr/bin/make menuconfig || exit 1
      ;;
   esac
fi


-- 
Ned Ludd <solar@gentoo.org>

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-embedded] Interactive command

[Jason Stubbs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 712 bytes --]

On Thursday 14 July 2005 20:58, Ned Ludd wrote:
>       echo "being that no portage dev in his/her right mind would ever"
>       echo "allow interactive code in an ebuild we use bashrc tricks"

Actually, I promote interactive code in pkg_config(). There's no standard as 
to what it will do, so there's no real solution other than telling the user 
and then waiting for confirmation.

As for the other phases, they should of course be 100% non-interactive. 
However, a pkg_presetup() or some such couldn't go astray - as long as it was 
purely optional. It would be much better to wait until portage supports 
arbitrary per-package env for it to be of any real use though.

Regards,
Jason Stubbs

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-embedded] Interactive command

[Kristian Benoit]

On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 07:58 -0400, Ned Ludd wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 01:13 -0400, Kristian Benoit wrote:
> > On Wed, 2005-07-13 at 20:02 -0400, Ned Ludd wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2005-07-13 at 18:44 -0400, Kristian Benoit wrote:
> > > > I'm trying to add a new command to ebuild (preconfig) for packages like
> 
> 
> > But anyway, the question is not whether the idea is good or not, but how
> > to get a menuconfig that works within ebuild.sh (called from spawn in
> > portage_exec ... called from the user with ebuild or emerge)?
> 
> Well portage is a non-interactive tool and it's staying that way.
> For what you want you will need to edit the busybox/-sources/uClibc 
> ebuild and manually add in a call to make menuconfig. 
> Or add something like this untested example to your 
> local /etc/portage/bashrc

I'm not trying to make it more interactive than it actually is.

stated from:
http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-x86.xml?part=3&chap=6#doc_chap3

"Performing Configuration Actions

Some applications include instructions that configure the package
further on your system. These instructions can be interactive and are
therefore not automatically executed. To run these configuration steps,
which are enlisted in the ebuild's (optional) config() function, use
ebuild's config functionality:


Code Listing 11: Configuring a package


# ebuild path/to/ebuild config"

I'm trying to do the same as config does, but in as a preconfig that
would only be also called on user request.

My goal is actually mostly learning portage internal so it might never
do it's way into production and it might be fine like that.

Thanks for the bashrc tip, I did'nt know that.

Kristian

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-embedded] Interactive command

[Kristian Benoit]

On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 08:43 +0200, Patrick Lauer wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 01:13 -0400, Kristian Benoit wrote:
> > What I want is "emerge busybox uclibc vanilla-sources nano". Should
> > unpack only the 3 first packages, show me busybox menuconfig, uclibc
> > menuconfig and vanilla-sources menuconfig and only then perform the rest
> > of the installation as usual (without re-unpacking the 3 packages).
> I really really hope that you want this to be a totally optional feature
> that is never ever enabled by default.

Of course it has to be totally optional and preconfig should be called
before any packages compilation. So that you get every preconfig
interactive prompt before everything else is done.

> When I run emerge -uD world on a server I don't accept any ebuild
> waiting for interactive input. For stagebuilding and other activities
> this behaviour is also unacceptable. 

I wont accept that either :).

> >  And
> > save the configs for futur use. So if my configs does not fit my need,
> > re-emerging busybox with USE=savedconfig should get me the busybox
> > menuconfig back using the previously configured ".config".
> Patch the ebuilds with your .config

Nope, it would just use the actual solution, use the one
in /etc/busybox/busybox.config

> > But anyway, the question is not whether the idea is good or not, but how
> > to get a menuconfig that works within ebuild.sh (called from spawn in
> > portage_exec ... called from the user with ebuild or emerge)?
> *shudder* I hope this stays limited to your overlay.
>
> wkr,
> Patrick

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Interactive command

[Kristian Benoit]

On Wed, 2005-07-13 at 16:49 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> BTW, it's not in good form to post to multiple lists where only
> subscribers can respond.

I appologise.

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-embedded] Interactive command

[Kristian Benoit]

On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 21:37 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> On Thursday 14 July 2005 20:58, Ned Ludd wrote:
> >       echo "being that no portage dev in his/her right mind would ever"
> >       echo "allow interactive code in an ebuild we use bashrc tricks"
> 
> Actually, I promote interactive code in pkg_config(). There's no standard as 
> to what it will do, so there's no real solution other than telling the user 
> and then waiting for confirmation.
> 
> As for the other phases, they should of course be 100% non-interactive. 
> However, a pkg_presetup() or some such couldn't go astray - as long as it was 
> purely optional. It would be much better to wait until portage supports 
> arbitrary per-package env for it to be of any real use though.

I just checked and pkg_config does not handle make menuconfig correctly
either :( Probably a bug.

One of my option was to unpack, config, merge (it would do the same, but
you would have to know you must config after unpack)... I'm goiing to
check how to fix that. :)

Kristian

> Regards,
> Jason Stubbs

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-embedded] Interactive command

[Michael Cummings]

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

Kristian Benoit wrote:
> # ebuild path/to/ebuild config"
> 
> I'm trying to do the same as config does, but in as a preconfig that
> would only be also called on user request.
> 

I'm just idly thinking here, and I'm sorry if this has already been said
better - but I could see some value in an *optional* src_preconfig()
function that allows you to run a manual config such as in the make
menuconfig case - not required, but if present the ebuild breaks out
with the einfo message, then when you go to run emerge again detects the
change and carries on. Course as soon as I type this I realize that
would require even more finangling since you would want to avoid
clobbering with features=clean flags. Not sure of the mechanics on how
this is done for the portage emerge process, but even stopping the
emerge process for those packages that *must* have a preconfig done
would help (are there any though? I can think of one maybe, but not
really anything to demand new functionality in portage yet).

2 probably pointless cents on the matter,

- -mike
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFC1oxbq1ztTp5/Ti4RAh8hAJ4lgOVUpY5KKgwi5kuNuFNRqvt5rgCePCg1
GwezKKJ5hEJ3HU2XqL5DB7w=
=sCo+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-embedded] Interactive command

[Kristian Benoit]

On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 12:01 -0400, Michael Cummings wrote:
> Not sure of the mechanics on how
> this is done for the portage emerge process, but even stopping the
> emerge process for those packages that *must* have a preconfig done
> would help (are there any though? I can think of one maybe, but not
> really anything to demand new functionality in portage yet).

This problem is mostly present in the embedded world. As the packages
have to be fine tuned (as a kernel is) at compiled time for the system
on which it is beiing build. For example, uClibc and busybox uses a
kernel like config.

As described on busybox's home page:

"BusyBox combines tiny versions of many common UNIX utilities into a
single small executable. It provides replacements for most of the
utilities you usually find in GNU fileutils, shellutils, etc. The
utilities in BusyBox generally have fewer options than their
full-featured GNU cousins; however, the options that are included
provide the expected functionality and behave very much like their GNU
counterparts. BusyBox provides a fairly complete environment for any
small or embedded system."

With so many applications/options provided by a single package, that aim
to go in small memory/storage system, one must understand that users
must fine tune it.

Kristian

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-embedded] Interactive command

[Drake Wyrm]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 888 bytes --]

Kristian Benoit <kbenoit@opersys.com> wrote:
 
> I just checked and pkg_config does not handle make menuconfig correctly
> either :( Probably a bug.

Sorry I didn't tune into this thread earlier...

Most ncurses-based tools, including most menuconfig scripts, need to be
attached to an interactive terminal in order to function properly. Some,
and you mentioned vim as an example, include code to find a terminal.
Some don't. Since emerge wraps everything for logging purposes, when you
run menuconfig, it's attached to a pipe. What you'll probably need to do
is something like

	make menuconfig 0</dev/tty 1>/dev/tty || die "wombats!"

which should attach dialog to your controlling terminal.

-- 
Batou: Hey, Major... You ever hear of "human rights"?
Kusanagi: I understand the concept, but I've never seen it in action.
  -- "Ghost in the Shell", Shirow Masamune

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-embedded] Interactive command

[Paul de Vrieze]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1147 bytes --]

On Thursday 14 July 2005 14:37, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> On Thursday 14 July 2005 20:58, Ned Ludd wrote:
> >       echo "being that no portage dev in his/her right mind would
> > ever" echo "allow interactive code in an ebuild we use bashrc tricks"
>
> Actually, I promote interactive code in pkg_config(). There's no
> standard as to what it will do, so there's no real solution other than
> telling the user and then waiting for confirmation.
>
> As for the other phases, they should of course be 100% non-interactive.
> However, a pkg_presetup() or some such couldn't go astray - as long as
> it was purely optional. It would be much better to wait until portage
> supports arbitrary per-package env for it to be of any real use though.

Wouldn't it better suit our needs to write a configuration program that 
packages can feed some custom configuration questions, and that then 
spits out something that can be used by the ebuilds. This would allow 
offline configuration of ebuilds etc. And something that was saved.

Paul

-- 
Paul de Vrieze
Gentoo Developer
Mail: pauldv@gentoo.org
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-embedded] Interactive command

[Jason Stubbs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1839 bytes --]

On Tuesday 23 August 2005 22:41, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> On Thursday 14 July 2005 14:37, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> > On Thursday 14 July 2005 20:58, Ned Ludd wrote:
> > >       echo "being that no portage dev in his/her right mind would
> > > ever" echo "allow interactive code in an ebuild we use bashrc tricks"
> >
> > Actually, I promote interactive code in pkg_config(). There's no
> > standard as to what it will do, so there's no real solution other than
> > telling the user and then waiting for confirmation.
> >
> > As for the other phases, they should of course be 100% non-interactive.
> > However, a pkg_presetup() or some such couldn't go astray - as long as
> > it was purely optional. It would be much better to wait until portage
> > supports arbitrary per-package env for it to be of any real use though.
>
> Wouldn't it better suit our needs to write a configuration program that
> packages can feed some custom configuration questions, and that then
> spits out something that can be used by the ebuilds. This would allow
> offline configuration of ebuilds etc. And something that was saved.

This limits the possibilities of what can be done, no? For example, answers 
determining the following questions or the selection of questions based on 
how the package was installed. Indeed there could be different questions 
based on whether it appears to be an upgrade or fresh install.

If the only benefits are being able to provide a consistent interface and 
"offline" configuration, I don't really see the effort being worth it. A 
usable interface abstraction can't really be created until the requirements 
are known (which they're not due to pkg_config being severely underused) 
and batched configuration can be done by creating a text file with answers 
and piping.

-- 
Jason Stubbs

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-embedded] Interactive command

[Paul de Vrieze]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1348 bytes --]

On Tuesday 23 August 2005 17:12, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> >
> > Wouldn't it better suit our needs to write a configuration program
> > that packages can feed some custom configuration questions, and that
> > then spits out something that can be used by the ebuilds. This would
> > allow offline configuration of ebuilds etc. And something that was
> > saved.
>
> This limits the possibilities of what can be done, no? For example,
> answers determining the following questions or the selection of
> questions based on how the package was installed. Indeed there could be
> different questions based on whether it appears to be an upgrade or
> fresh install.
>
> If the only benefits are being able to provide a consistent interface
> and "offline" configuration, I don't really see the effort being worth
> it. A usable interface abstraction can't really be created until the
> requirements are known (which they're not due to pkg_config being
> severely underused) and batched configuration can be done by creating a
> text file with answers and piping.

You're right. Such a program could anyway be used for most packages. That 
might currently be a better solution (and would limit the complexity of 
the program).

Paul

-- 
Paul de Vrieze
Gentoo Developer
Mail: pauldv@gentoo.org
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net

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