Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: logrotate and xinetd use flags

["Michał Górny" <mgorny@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1614 bytes --]

On Sun, 24 Apr 2011 16:58:23 -0500
William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org> wrote:

> I feel that the current approach (using INSTALL_MASK) to control
> whether these configuration files are installed or not is not well
> documented. We tell people about it on the mailing lists, but I do
> not know of a place where it is documented.
> 
> Also, it seems to be an all or nothing arrangement. If I do not want
> logrotate support, I have to set the INSTALL_MASK then if I decide
> later I want it, I have to unset the INSTALL_MASK and run "emerge -e
> world" to get the files installed.

I'm currently working on improving the situation. I'd like to create
a tool which would allow users to easily add and remove INSTALL_MASKs
(including a few common sets), and rebuild the packages as necessary.
This, however, would require some fixes in portage [1].

> I guess the argument against the use flag was that packages were being
> rebuilt just to install configuration files. I can see how that could
> be a pita for big packages. Did anyone ever bring up using pkg_config
> to un/install these files based on the use flags?

I don't think that would work. And if it does, then either PM or even
PMS is broken by design. The pkg_config() phase should have the same
flags set as the build had, or don't refer to flags at all.

In addition, upstream-installed config files often require running sed.
And this requires unpacking & configuring the package. Really don't
seem appropriate for pkg_config().

[1] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=364633

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]