From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NxHVw-0007oc-FP for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 10:20:40 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4EAF0E0922; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 10:20:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7775BE0C71 for ; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 10:20:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12F661B4136; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 10:20:26 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -2.121 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.121 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.478, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DgncM3ChSG+m; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 10:20:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pw0-f49.google.com (mail-pw0-f49.google.com [209.85.160.49]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C83D1B4106; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 10:20:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: by pwj2 with SMTP id 2so948556pwj.36 for ; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 03:20:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:received:date:from:to:cc :subject:message-id:references:mime-version:content-type :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=+g/zUEIepq/0kBXh/mjnGAZajc/F818sgkUGWWCR13Q=; b=OmsaOw9iJc759moEAJD3qPI7+MmbgIiPC1ewewNzdNVenJrHn1o08Wr7IrmQicCWLw aZZMEwqyt8HZzKeIY1EHlnYrQA+c6Ti9o0rn8lDJaoIpxQFjoitZIaifdWgKPEEuB+Ak 8fMxAkJSkFKb0GzSJ00s6Y80neiExR+lxtK9g= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=u+aUV53RrsMdExQNEmB2VZAPr63P8jPO+viUOz8x76gsdBLFCNQLg0F29/2v7WbHIz eyvcM/v8UyF3GQnED8CZC+sTMbrdbUS6lRVrD9gH9eXM3mUGxLnUXYVMjoNp5I1tq7r+ AUzNfn2Lls+wyaeDy+v89NE76u82SVUTnQmJs= Received: by 10.142.7.41 with SMTP id 41mr107503wfg.320.1270117219030; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 03:20:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.gmail.com (c-67-171-128-62.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [67.171.128.62]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 22sm1192830pzk.13.2010.04.01.03.20.16 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 01 Apr 2010 03:20:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by smtp.gmail.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 01 Apr 2010 03:18:25 -0700 Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 03:18:25 -0700 From: Brian Harring To: eva@gentoo.org Cc: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] pkg_pretend USE validation and VALID_USE alternative Message-ID: <20100401101825.GK11663@hrair> References: <20100331092035.GA11663@hrair> <20100331174925.GA16267@faith> <20100331194626.GG11663@hrair> <20100331205628.368fb02c@snowmobile> <20100401073109.GI11663@hrair> <20100401084102.2560f3a3@snowmobile> <20100401075608.GJ11663@hrair> <1270116620.17214.1.camel@gdartigu.lan.rep.sj> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="P7Tqkd/m/Jnohiaz" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1270116620.17214.1.camel@gdartigu.lan.rep.sj> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Archives-Salt: ef60ed3c-bce7-4ade-9860-8ba31f2b62a0 X-Archives-Hash: bd3af126ec42897bb773a76a1cf5eabf --P7Tqkd/m/Jnohiaz Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 12:10:20PM +0200, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote: > jumping on the train here, but who said PM would not feed proper data to > pkg_pretend so it would behave like the DEPEND were already built. Could > some guy involved in a PM development tell us about how this would be > handled ? Good idea, but not really viable. The only scenario where this would=20 work cleanly is in has_version checks which most of the time should be=20 blockers/deps anyways. Basically, you want the PM to lie to the ebuild in some fashion. =20 Since pkg_pretend is free form, it's effectively impossible to cover=20 the scenarios it could check on- consider checking the kernel=20 config/version, or checking the active jvm/python version. Some of those can sort of be handled, but it requires a lot of custom=20 code (code that has to change as the tools involved change) to pull it=20 off. As said, good idea, but it was ruled out due to it being techically=20 infeasible considering the gains. ~harring --P7Tqkd/m/Jnohiaz Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.13 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAku0cvEACgkQsiLx3HvNzgdqbwCeOEuJFeVO9ceIscGWbSPrvhO4 ET4AnRbz+ObhVHq5lnZhXL3cvbAYv5YR =iMI6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --P7Tqkd/m/Jnohiaz--