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 DBE741386F3 for ; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 14:38:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3F0BD14241; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 14:38:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ob0-f179.google.com (mail-ob0-f179.google.com [209.85.214.179]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1EE1C141DF for ; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 14:38:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: by obbhe7 with SMTP id he7so14088937obb.0 for ; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 07:38:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references :mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=4e7Jr8ftRfZTet35+CdqArgbTG7dPTYPjbV282TVfCY=; b=gTXG3emYEn56FccxX55gHuiGcjRS3iVVvKEMm/RvAYfYnjNPtxKxg1OVwQpXkvJBZG dyGaAgFr8NAthi4wC8rx8mFnsxWJjA55geZ5ZCpoM17n+KghE0PKqOnT7PUJikg1w8fP tVOMlY5nP5j+XoH6f5v2Kh4YS4fwxkb7lmqewOl1JnqAjhSQmu1OxvAig1gyGM3s7/Xj lh2zmtabKaABs7QFly0cb7shtnYWEsyW8XfhilDsqGWIUbKjz6o22BXf9r7GEOb5HwUu xC+WDfqb6wfAjddy+klLWiqdqGWAbq5gCqfk4VwgNBjOmzVn/1UI59JdpH0p71pqkRfc /2jw== X-Received: by 10.182.60.230 with SMTP id k6mr4453134obr.83.1439390301735; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 07:38:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from linux1 (cpe-66-68-34-247.austin.res.rr.com. [66.68.34.247]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id yo9sm4209361obc.3.2015.08.12.07.38.19 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 12 Aug 2015 07:38:20 -0700 (PDT) Sender: William Hubbs Received: (nullmailer pid 25111 invoked by uid 1000); Wed, 12 Aug 2015 14:38:19 -0000 Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 09:38:19 -0500 From: William Hubbs To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: useflag policies Message-ID: <20150812143819.GA25080@linux1> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <55C7AC24.2040503@gentoo.org> <55C9CA32.3060300@gentoo.org> <55C9F189.10102@gentoo.org> <20150812052120.5a83c3b1@googlemail.com> <55CB4CB0.8050208@gentoo.org> 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="wac7ysb48OaltWcw" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <55CB4CB0.8050208@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-Archives-Salt: 150b9cad-e369-46bd-86a8-70449de4aebc X-Archives-Hash: d91735f3a756b4af4759027165027614 --wac7ysb48OaltWcw Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 09:40:00AM -0400, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 08/12/2015 12:21 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 23:30:31 +1000 > > Michael Palimaka wrote: > >> I invite you to reproduce the problem yourself then make the > >> judgement. Using REQUIRED_USE like this makes the affected packages > >> unusable. > >=20 > > Can't we all (except for the usual suspect) just agree that REQUIRED_USE > > was a mistake, and go back to pkg_pretend? The only justification for > > REQUIRED_USE was that it could allegedly be used in an automated > > fashion, and this hasn't happened. > >=20 >=20 > I'm starting to see the light. USE flags and their > combinations/conflicts are almost always package- if not > ebuild-specific. The problem isn't that REQUIRED_USE forces me to do > something, it's that portage will only ever be able to output 45 pages > of garbage rather than telling me how to fix it (which again, depends on > the package/ebuild). >=20 > At the very least, we need to be able to tag REQUIRED_USE conflicts with > human readable error messages. OK, so I know I can't have USE=3D"qt4 qt5" > for this package... but why? How do I fix it? We can do that with > pkg_pretend and a bunch of "if" statements, or maybe there's value in > having the requirements in a variable -- who knows. The former is a lot > simpler to implement. I always wondered why pkg_pretend never caught on. I to can see the advantage of it over REQUIRED_USE; it would allow the package maintainer to give specific error messages about why use flag combinations are invalid for a package. Without really knowing what the opposing viewpoint is, I think pkg_pretend is the better way to go as well. William --wac7ysb48OaltWcw Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iEYEARECAAYFAlXLWk0ACgkQblQW9DDEZTjZywCfZ78qe1TcsughJ/Z5V54iCSjx Gu0AoLk6JZD6cIns4+QU/x53h99uin1M =ziW8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --wac7ysb48OaltWcw--