From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 792C1138010 for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 10:45:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1A4B721C00A; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 10:45:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pb0-f53.google.com (mail-pb0-f53.google.com [209.85.160.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F79221C0A7; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 10:44:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: by pbbro2 with SMTP id ro2so11940650pbb.40 for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 03:44:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=z8h8TD5HQ3DqXw1yu3qUe3hujITTjpTqMH7f6Qa1yhY=; b=YJ0A0nTbBrf4/rBmqa3x0YwSEVBfsOWhnM4V4CpjeENuqrCYdxT6JpSZKZwJ5YOUFD pWTywBJXW+KWKtTBJm8Bgu+rVgSPC55MY972he7lqPTAy7zNjtoVryqteSrjcEVsL3eG I+H9xhwSr3U9oBBqCygJy35HMt8RLqDe3wec8So5NxsDx5mhDGz50GxXO85vONni+5gU eYCn4KnMn+fpk81i0NaZ6putosQ1oYbai0UMLIjPdjBxL9UAn+fstJqmcmDZR2E5dvZ8 6mMgDJtqVmFSKCwA42DLSkrtb1i9HIAJ5ZAZtWK52bw6V62dIjaAR+7bFVG1Pvi+wfj8 tadw== Received: by 10.68.223.3 with SMTP id qq3mr544875pbc.88.1347965089093; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 03:44:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.gmail.com:587 (74-95-192-101-SFBA.hfc.comcastbusiness.net. [74.95.192.101]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id tw5sm8452339pbc.48.2012.09.18.03.44.46 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 18 Sep 2012 03:44:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: by smtp.gmail.com:587 (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 18 Sep 2012 03:45:00 -0700 Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 03:45:00 -0700 From: Brian Harring To: Micha?? G??rny Cc: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org, gentoo-pms@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP: gentoo sync based unified deps proposas Message-ID: <20120918104500.GE5384@localhost> References: <20120916135211.GC23030@localhost> <20120918102551.500ff19b@pomiocik.lan> <20120918092426.GA5384@localhost> <20120918114742.7e87a411@pomiocik.lan> 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: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120918114742.7e87a411@pomiocik.lan> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Archives-Salt: 835c76c7-ac23-4f34-b2c1-38fdd3c2f038 X-Archives-Hash: fddc20c378cbec82e53203de2bfbb862 On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 11:47:42AM +0200, Micha?? G??rny wrote: > On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 02:24:26 -0700 > Brian Harring wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 10:25:51AM +0200, Micha?? G??rny wrote: > > > > test depends: to specifically mark those dependencies that are > > > > only needed for when the pkg is being tested; effectively > > > > ephemeral build/run time depends that go away once testing is > > > > completed. > > > > > > Does that mean that USE=test is going away somehow? > > > > If you think it through, a test use flag still is needed in the cases > > where the rdep itself would change if test was enabled; such a source > > is fairy rare, but not always just someone being moronic- certain > > cases to do testing, the tests need to reach in fairly deeply and > > recompilation for compile vs test isn't exposed. > > Yes, and sometimes we're doing 'use test'. I simply don't see how > adding a separate group of dependencies just for 'test' phase is going > to help us. > They fit just fine into build-time dependencies right now. I'm going to assume you typo'd "build-time" into "run-time"; on the offchance you've never written actual test code, to test the code you have to *run* the results. Simple example, portage doesn't need eselect nor logrotate, nor afaik selinux or paxutils, till runtime since it doesn't test those pathways. A non-crap resolver can exploit that gap when it comes to parallelization. Just heading off an email from you, no, you cannot just stick it into RDEPEND then. If you did so, the test deps would be locked into the required runtime graph for as long as the pkg was installed. If in doubt of how that matters; trace the usage of gtest, nose, etc. Nose is a good example additionally since a properly setup setup.py, the pkg doesn't need nose for build- just strictly for test. > > > A quick > > > glance shows that what you have expanded there, a fairly reasonable > > > Gentoo dev will solve using: > > > > > > RDEPEND="[common depends]" > > > DEPEND="${RDEPEND} > > > [build only depends]" > > > > from diffball (under current EAPIs) > > > > """ > > RDEPEND=">=sys-libs/zlib-1.1.4 > > >=app-arch/bzip2-1.0.2 > > app-arch/xz-utils" > > DEPEND="${RDEPEND} > > virtual/pkgconfig" > > """ > > > > becomes the following under the proposal: > > > > """ > > DEPENDENCIES=">=sys-libs/zlib-1.1.4 > > >=app-arch/bzip2-1.0.2 > > app-arch/xz-utils" > > dep:build? ( virtual/pkgconfig )" > > """ > > Err, shouldn't the first three deps be namespaced? No. Please read the glep, specifically the section "basic rules". Also, you come up with a valid criticism, valid point, etc, something *worthwhile*, I'll respond. If it doesn't meet that criteria, assume I won't respond (feel free to bitch to the council during whatever vote occurs for this GLEP that I ignored your noise; it's a risk I'll willingly take). ~harring