[gentoo-dev] USE flag name collision in use.local.desc "graphite"

[gentoo-dev] USE flag name collision in use.local.desc "graphite"

[Walter Dnes]

  Is it considered a reportable bug?

[i660][waltdnes][~] grep :graphite /usr/portage/profiles/*.desc
/usr/portage/profiles/use.local.desc:dev-lang/gnat-gpl:graphite - Add support for the framework for loop optimizations based on a polyhedral intermediate representation
/usr/portage/profiles/use.local.desc:media-libs/harfbuzz:graphite - Use graphite to render complex non-Roman writing systems
/usr/portage/profiles/use.local.desc:sys-devel/gcc:graphite - Add support for the framework for loop optimizations based on a polyhedral intermediate representation

  The "graphite" USE flag means something entirely different for
harfbuzz, i.e. build media-libs/harfbuzz against media-gfx/graphite2

-- 
Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org>
I don't run "desktop environments"; I run useful applications

Re: [gentoo-dev] USE flag name collision in use.local.desc "graphite"

[Mart Raudsepp]

Ühel kenal päeval, L, 29.04.2017 kell 22:32, kirjutas Walter Dnes:
>   Is it considered a reportable bug?
> 
> [i660][waltdnes][~] grep :graphite /usr/portage/profiles/*.desc
> /usr/portage/profiles/use.local.desc:dev-lang/gnat-gpl:graphite - Add
> support for the framework for loop optimizations based on a
> polyhedral intermediate representation
> /usr/portage/profiles/use.local.desc:media-libs/harfbuzz:graphite -
> Use graphite to render complex non-Roman writing systems
> /usr/portage/profiles/use.local.desc:sys-devel/gcc:graphite - Add
> support for the framework for loop optimizations based on a
> polyhedral intermediate representation
> 
>   The "graphite" USE flag means something entirely different for
> harfbuzz, i.e. build media-libs/harfbuzz against media-gfx/graphite2

That's why they are local. You aren't supposed to go and enable those
flags globally usually.
That said, it does seem a bit suboptimal and maybe one of them could be
describing the feature added by the dependency instead in the USE flag
naming. So it could at least be a bug where discussions of this could
take place, even ifthat doesn't lead to changes in the end (if such a
bug didn't happen in the past)


Mart

Re: [gentoo-dev] USE flag name collision in use.local.desc "graphite"

[Brian Evans]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1310 bytes --]

On 04/30/2017 06:36 AM, Mart Raudsepp wrote:
> Ühel kenal päeval, L, 29.04.2017 kell 22:32, kirjutas Walter Dnes:
>>   Is it considered a reportable bug?
>>
>> [i660][waltdnes][~] grep :graphite /usr/portage/profiles/*.desc
>> /usr/portage/profiles/use.local.desc:dev-lang/gnat-gpl:graphite - Add
>> support for the framework for loop optimizations based on a
>> polyhedral intermediate representation
>> /usr/portage/profiles/use.local.desc:media-libs/harfbuzz:graphite -
>> Use graphite to render complex non-Roman writing systems
>> /usr/portage/profiles/use.local.desc:sys-devel/gcc:graphite - Add
>> support for the framework for loop optimizations based on a
>> polyhedral intermediate representation
>>
>>   The "graphite" USE flag means something entirely different for
>> harfbuzz, i.e. build media-libs/harfbuzz against media-gfx/graphite2
> 
> That's why they are local. You aren't supposed to go and enable those
> flags globally usually.

This statement is a big confusion for users and is a pet peeve of mine.

There is no such thing as calling a USE flag "local" or "global" except
for where the description lies.

If they want to enable a flag to apply system-wide, then it does not
matter where the description is. To users, a USE flag is a USE flag.

Brian



[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 981 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] USE flag name collision in use.local.desc "graphite"

[Kent Fredric]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 737 bytes --]

On Sun, 30 Apr 2017 09:48:58 -0400
Brian Evans <grknight@gentoo.org> wrote:

> If they want to enable a flag to apply system-wide, then it does not
> matter where the description is. To users, a USE flag is a USE flag.

Terminology wise, this is more a side effect that users are exposed to
global methods of setting use flags first, and specific methods of
setting use flags second.

The reality is *all* USE flags have behaviour specific to the packages
they're on.

Just some packages share the same interpretations of the same flags,
and so it *can* make sense to set them simultaneously for multiple
packages.

But this ends up in a "Cognition, Language, Naming things and
Namespaces are hard" corner either way.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]