[gentoo-dev] [PATCH] use.desc: Improve description of USE=test

[gentoo-dev] [PATCH] use.desc: Improve description of USE=test

[Michał Górny]

Improve the description of USE=test to clearly indicate what the flag
does instead of claiming it workaround for Portage.
---
 profiles/use.desc | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/profiles/use.desc b/profiles/use.desc
index 078226b92250..a2156de5f174 100644
--- a/profiles/use.desc
+++ b/profiles/use.desc
@@ -338,7 +338,7 @@ taglib - Enable tagging support with taglib
 tcl - Add support the Tcl language
 tcmalloc - Use the dev-util/google-perftools libraries to replace the malloc() implementation with a possibly faster one
 tcpd - Add support for TCP wrappers
-test - Workaround to pull in packages needed to run with FEATURES=test. Portage-2.1.2 handles this internally, so don't set it in make.conf/package.use anymore
+test - Enable dependencies and/or preparations necessary to run tests
 theora - Add support for the Theora Video Compression Codec
 threads - Add threads support for various packages. Usually pthreads
 tidy - Add support for HTML Tidy
-- 
2.18.0

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] use.desc: Improve description of USE=test

[Mike Gilbert]

On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 10:34 AM Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> Improve the description of USE=test to clearly indicate what the flag
> does instead of claiming it workaround for Portage.
> ---
>  profiles/use.desc | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/profiles/use.desc b/profiles/use.desc
> index 078226b92250..a2156de5f174 100644
> --- a/profiles/use.desc
> +++ b/profiles/use.desc
> @@ -338,7 +338,7 @@ taglib - Enable tagging support with taglib
>  tcl - Add support the Tcl language
>  tcmalloc - Use the dev-util/google-perftools libraries to replace the malloc() implementation with a possibly faster one
>  tcpd - Add support for TCP wrappers
> -test - Workaround to pull in packages needed to run with FEATURES=test. Portage-2.1.2 handles this internally, so don't set it in make.conf/package.use anymore
> +test - Enable dependencies and/or preparations necessary to run tests
>  theora - Add support for the Theora Video Compression Codec
>  threads - Add threads support for various packages. Usually pthreads
>  tidy - Add support for HTML Tidy

Looks good to me!

[gentoo-dev] [PATCH] use.desc: Improve description of USE=test

[Michał Górny]

Improve the description of USE=test to clearly indicate what the flag
does instead of claiming it workaround for Portage.
---
 profiles/use.desc | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

Changed in v2: added description of FEATURES=test relevance

diff --git a/profiles/use.desc b/profiles/use.desc
index 078226b92250..bd360194a09b 100644
--- a/profiles/use.desc
+++ b/profiles/use.desc
@@ -338,7 +338,7 @@ taglib - Enable tagging support with taglib
 tcl - Add support the Tcl language
 tcmalloc - Use the dev-util/google-perftools libraries to replace the malloc() implementation with a possibly faster one
 tcpd - Add support for TCP wrappers
-test - Workaround to pull in packages needed to run with FEATURES=test. Portage-2.1.2 handles this internally, so don't set it in make.conf/package.use anymore
+test - Enable dependencies and/or preparations necessary to run tests (usually automatically controled by FEATURES=test but can be switched independently)
 theora - Add support for the Theora Video Compression Codec
 threads - Add threads support for various packages. Usually pthreads
 tidy - Add support for HTML Tidy
-- 
2.18.0

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] use.desc: Improve description of USE=test

[Davide Pesavento]

On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 11:00 AM Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> Improve the description of USE=test to clearly indicate what the flag
> does instead of claiming it workaround for Portage.
> ---
>  profiles/use.desc | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> Changed in v2: added description of FEATURES=test relevance
>
> diff --git a/profiles/use.desc b/profiles/use.desc
> index 078226b92250..bd360194a09b 100644
> --- a/profiles/use.desc
> +++ b/profiles/use.desc
> @@ -338,7 +338,7 @@ taglib - Enable tagging support with taglib
>  tcl - Add support the Tcl language
>  tcmalloc - Use the dev-util/google-perftools libraries to replace the malloc() implementation with a possibly faster one
>  tcpd - Add support for TCP wrappers
> -test - Workaround to pull in packages needed to run with FEATURES=test. Portage-2.1.2 handles this internally, so don't set it in make.conf/package.use anymore
> +test - Enable dependencies and/or preparations necessary to run tests (usually automatically controled by FEATURES=test but can be switched independently)

s/controled/controlled/
s/switched/enabled/

>  theora - Add support for the Theora Video Compression Codec
>  threads - Add threads support for various packages. Usually pthreads
>  tidy - Add support for HTML Tidy
> --
> 2.18.0
>

Thanks,
Davide

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] use.desc: Improve description of USE=test

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1589 bytes --]

On Tue, 2018-08-21 at 01:54 -0400, Davide Pesavento wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 11:00 AM Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > 
> > Improve the description of USE=test to clearly indicate what the flag
> > does instead of claiming it workaround for Portage.
> > ---
> >  profiles/use.desc | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > Changed in v2: added description of FEATURES=test relevance
> > 
> > diff --git a/profiles/use.desc b/profiles/use.desc
> > index 078226b92250..bd360194a09b 100644
> > --- a/profiles/use.desc
> > +++ b/profiles/use.desc
> > @@ -338,7 +338,7 @@ taglib - Enable tagging support with taglib
> >  tcl - Add support the Tcl language
> >  tcmalloc - Use the dev-util/google-perftools libraries to replace the malloc() implementation with a possibly faster one
> >  tcpd - Add support for TCP wrappers
> > -test - Workaround to pull in packages needed to run with FEATURES=test. Portage-2.1.2 handles this internally, so don't set it in make.conf/package.use anymore
> > +test - Enable dependencies and/or preparations necessary to run tests (usually automatically controled by FEATURES=test but can be switched independently)
> 
> s/controled/controlled/
> s/switched/enabled/

It can also be disabled.  Maybe 'toggled'?

> 
> >  theora - Add support for the Theora Video Compression Codec
> >  threads - Add threads support for various packages. Usually pthreads
> >  tidy - Add support for HTML Tidy
> > --
> > 2.18.0
> > 
> 
> Thanks,
> Davide
> 

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 963 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] [PATCH v3] use.desc: Improve description of USE=test

[Michał Górny]

Improve the description of USE=test to clearly indicate what the flag
does instead of claiming it workaround for Portage.
---
 profiles/use.desc | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/profiles/use.desc b/profiles/use.desc
index 078226b92250..36fa72009cb4 100644
--- a/profiles/use.desc
+++ b/profiles/use.desc
@@ -338,7 +338,7 @@ taglib - Enable tagging support with taglib
 tcl - Add support the Tcl language
 tcmalloc - Use the dev-util/google-perftools libraries to replace the malloc() implementation with a possibly faster one
 tcpd - Add support for TCP wrappers
-test - Workaround to pull in packages needed to run with FEATURES=test. Portage-2.1.2 handles this internally, so don't set it in make.conf/package.use anymore
+test - Enable dependencies and/or preparations necessary to run tests (usually controlled by FEATURES=test but can be toggled independently)
 theora - Add support for the Theora Video Compression Codec
 threads - Add threads support for various packages. Usually pthreads
 tidy - Add support for HTML Tidy
-- 
2.18.0

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] use.desc: Improve description of USE=test

[Davide Pesavento]

On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 2:46 AM Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2018-08-21 at 01:54 -0400, Davide Pesavento wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 11:00 AM Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Improve the description of USE=test to clearly indicate what the flag
> > > does instead of claiming it workaround for Portage.
> > > ---
> > >  profiles/use.desc | 2 +-
> > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > Changed in v2: added description of FEATURES=test relevance
> > >
> > > diff --git a/profiles/use.desc b/profiles/use.desc
> > > index 078226b92250..bd360194a09b 100644
> > > --- a/profiles/use.desc
> > > +++ b/profiles/use.desc
> > > @@ -338,7 +338,7 @@ taglib - Enable tagging support with taglib
> > >  tcl - Add support the Tcl language
> > >  tcmalloc - Use the dev-util/google-perftools libraries to replace the malloc() implementation with a possibly faster one
> > >  tcpd - Add support for TCP wrappers
> > > -test - Workaround to pull in packages needed to run with FEATURES=test. Portage-2.1.2 handles this internally, so don't set it in make.conf/package.use anymore
> > > +test - Enable dependencies and/or preparations necessary to run tests (usually automatically controled by FEATURES=test but can be switched independently)
> >
> > s/controled/controlled/
> > s/switched/enabled/
>
> It can also be disabled.  Maybe 'toggled'?
>

Wait, are you saying that I can set USE=-test while FEATURES=test is
enabled? Is that a valid combination?

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] use.desc: Improve description of USE=test

[Davide Pesavento]

On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 11:57 AM Davide Pesavento <pesa@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 2:46 AM Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 2018-08-21 at 01:54 -0400, Davide Pesavento wrote:
> > > On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 11:00 AM Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Improve the description of USE=test to clearly indicate what the flag
> > > > does instead of claiming it workaround for Portage.
> > > > ---
> > > >  profiles/use.desc | 2 +-
> > > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > >
> > > > Changed in v2: added description of FEATURES=test relevance
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/profiles/use.desc b/profiles/use.desc
> > > > index 078226b92250..bd360194a09b 100644
> > > > --- a/profiles/use.desc
> > > > +++ b/profiles/use.desc
> > > > @@ -338,7 +338,7 @@ taglib - Enable tagging support with taglib
> > > >  tcl - Add support the Tcl language
> > > >  tcmalloc - Use the dev-util/google-perftools libraries to replace the malloc() implementation with a possibly faster one
> > > >  tcpd - Add support for TCP wrappers
> > > > -test - Workaround to pull in packages needed to run with FEATURES=test. Portage-2.1.2 handles this internally, so don't set it in make.conf/package.use anymore
> > > > +test - Enable dependencies and/or preparations necessary to run tests (usually automatically controled by FEATURES=test but can be switched independently)
> > >
> > > s/controled/controlled/
> > > s/switched/enabled/
> >
> > It can also be disabled.  Maybe 'toggled'?
> >
>
> Wait, are you saying that I can set USE=-test while FEATURES=test is
> enabled? Is that a valid combination?

make.conf(5) says the following regarding FEATURES=test:

    This feature implies the "test"USE flag if it is a member of IUSE,
either explicitly or implicitly [...]. The "test" USE flag is also
automatically disabled when the "test" feature is disabled.

So, it looks like the whole "independently" part in the use desc is incorrect.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] use.desc: Improve description of USE=test

[Michał Górny]

Dnia 21 sierpnia 2018 17:57:48 CEST, Davide Pesavento <pesa@gentoo.org> napisał(a):
>On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 2:46 AM Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 2018-08-21 at 01:54 -0400, Davide Pesavento wrote:
>> > On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 11:00 AM Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org>
>wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Improve the description of USE=test to clearly indicate what the
>flag
>> > > does instead of claiming it workaround for Portage.
>> > > ---
>> > >  profiles/use.desc | 2 +-
>> > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> > >
>> > > Changed in v2: added description of FEATURES=test relevance
>> > >
>> > > diff --git a/profiles/use.desc b/profiles/use.desc
>> > > index 078226b92250..bd360194a09b 100644
>> > > --- a/profiles/use.desc
>> > > +++ b/profiles/use.desc
>> > > @@ -338,7 +338,7 @@ taglib - Enable tagging support with taglib
>> > >  tcl - Add support the Tcl language
>> > >  tcmalloc - Use the dev-util/google-perftools libraries to
>replace the malloc() implementation with a possibly faster one
>> > >  tcpd - Add support for TCP wrappers
>> > > -test - Workaround to pull in packages needed to run with
>FEATURES=test. Portage-2.1.2 handles this internally, so don't set it
>in make.conf/package.use anymore
>> > > +test - Enable dependencies and/or preparations necessary to run
>tests (usually automatically controled by FEATURES=test but can be
>switched independently)
>> >
>> > s/controled/controlled/
>> > s/switched/enabled/
>>
>> It can also be disabled.  Maybe 'toggled'?
>>
>
>Wait, are you saying that I can set USE=-test while FEATURES=test is
>enabled? Is that a valid combination?

Yes.


-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny (by phone)

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] use.desc: Improve description of USE=test

[Juippisi .]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 328 bytes --]

On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 3:57 PM, Davide Pesavento <pesa@gentoo.org> wrote:

>
> Wait, are you saying that I can set USE=-test while FEATURES=test is
> enabled? Is that a valid combination?
>

It's really annoying if you try to make some conditional stuff apply using
"if use test;" because it doesn't work with FEATURES="test".

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 710 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] use.desc: Improve description of USE=test

[Kristian Fiskerstrand]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 802 bytes --]

On 08/21/2018 10:06 PM, Juippisi . wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 3:57 PM, Davide Pesavento <pesa@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
>>
>> Wait, are you saying that I can set USE=-test while FEATURES=test is
>> enabled? Is that a valid combination?
>>
> 
> It's really annoying if you try to make some conditional stuff apply using
> "if use test;" because it doesn't work with FEATURES="test".
> 

if it doesn't work with FEATURES="test" but is othervise verified it
might be a case for a RESTRICT=test instead?

That said, you'll find RESTRICT="!test? ( test )" in plenty of ebuilds,
disabling the test phase if the use flag is unset altogether.

-- 
Kristian Fiskerstrand
OpenPGP keyblock reachable at hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net
fpr:94CB AFDD 3034 5109 5618 35AA 0B7F 8B60 E3ED FAE3


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] use.desc: Improve description of USE=test

[Thomas Deutschmann]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 414 bytes --]

On 2018-08-21 22:06, Juippisi . wrote:
> It's really annoying if you try to make some conditional stuff apply
> using "if use test;" because it doesn't work with FEATURES="test".

Yes, but these are bugs which are getting fixed. See bugs like
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=664104.


-- 
Regards,
Thomas Deutschmann / Gentoo Linux Developer
C4DD 695F A713 8F24 2AA1 5638 5849 7EE5 1D5D 74A5


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

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] use.desc: Improve description of USE=test

[Thomas Deutschmann]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1147 bytes --]

On 2018-08-21 18:23, Michał Górny wrote:
>> Wait, are you saying that I can set USE=-test while FEATURES=test is
>> enabled? Is that a valid combination?
>
> Yes.

The only thing I still don't understand yet: Do we support things like that?

I.e. should we add things like

> if has test ${FEATURES} && ! use test ; then
>         eerror "FEATURES=test requires USE=test."
>         die "FEATURES=test set but not USE=test"
> fi

if a package's src_test phase requires some conditional stuff or is it
something like "user shoot himself into the foot" so we do *not* care
because we still assume "if FEATURES=test, USE=test is *normally* set"?

Asking from user experience point of view: Imagine a user tries to
emerge a package which will compile multiple hours and src_test just
fails because some conditional stuff didn't run due to USE=-test
accidentally set by the user (in the past or was forgotten).

The code above in an early phase like pkg_setup would prevent such a bad
user experience, not?


-- 
Regards,
Thomas Deutschmann / Gentoo Linux Developer
C4DD 695F A713 8F24 2AA1 5638 5849 7EE5 1D5D 74A5


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

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] use.desc: Improve description of USE=test

[Mike Gilbert]

On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 9:21 PM Thomas Deutschmann <whissi@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> On 2018-08-21 18:23, Michał Górny wrote:
> >> Wait, are you saying that I can set USE=-test while FEATURES=test is
> >> enabled? Is that a valid combination?
> >
> > Yes.
>
> The only thing I still don't understand yet: Do we support things like that?
>
> I.e. should we add things like
>
> > if has test ${FEATURES} && ! use test ; then
> >         eerror "FEATURES=test requires USE=test."
> >         die "FEATURES=test set but not USE=test"
> > fi

You should never look at FEATURES in an ebuild; it is not defined in
PMS and is very Portage-specific.

> if a package's src_test phase requires some conditional stuff or is it
> something like "user shoot himself into the foot" so we do *not* care
> because we still assume "if FEATURES=test, USE=test is *normally* set"?

Ebuilds should be adjusted to not depend on FEATURES=test matching
USE=test. Setting RESTRICT="!test? ( test )" is generally sufficient.

> Asking from user experience point of view: Imagine a user tries to
> emerge a package which will compile multiple hours and src_test just
> fails because some conditional stuff didn't run due to USE=-test
> accidentally set by the user (in the past or was forgotten).

What user is going to set FEATURS=test and USE=-test? It's such a
silly thing to worry about.

Please stop inflating the scope of the issue.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] use.desc: Improve description of USE=test

[Kent Fredric]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 475 bytes --]

On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 22:29:29 -0400
Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Setting RESTRICT="!test? ( test )" is generally sufficient.

But that would require setting that virtually *everything* that has
both tests, and required dependencies for tests.

Which, in my experience, is practically everything with tests.

To the point it seems like that should be the *default* mechanic, not a
requirement that everyone pay not to have a randomly broken package.

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] use.desc: Improve description of USE=test

[Mike Gilbert]

On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 9:23 AM Kent Fredric <kentnl@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 22:29:29 -0400
> Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> > Setting RESTRICT="!test? ( test )" is generally sufficient.
>
> But that would require setting that virtually *everything* that has
> both tests, and required dependencies for tests.
>
> Which, in my experience, is practically everything with tests.
>
> To the point it seems like that should be the *default* mechanic, not a
> requirement that everyone pay not to have a randomly broken package.

If you want to define behavior that can be relied upon in ebuilds, it
should be specified in PMS. PMS does not define any meaning for the
"test" USE flag.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] use.desc: Improve description of USE=test

[Virgil Dupras]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1132 bytes --]

On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 10:27:01 -0400
Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 9:23 AM Kent Fredric <kentnl@gentoo.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 22:29:29 -0400
> > Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Setting RESTRICT="!test? ( test )" is generally sufficient.
> >
> > But that would require setting that virtually *everything* that has
> > both tests, and required dependencies for tests.
> >
> > Which, in my experience, is practically everything with tests.
> >
> > To the point it seems like that should be the *default* mechanic,
> > not a requirement that everyone pay not to have a randomly broken
> > package.
> 
> If you want to define behavior that can be relied upon in ebuilds, it
> should be specified in PMS. PMS does not define any meaning for the
> "test" USE flag.
> 

Which is the easiest path, updating the PMS or adding RESTRICT="!test?
( test )" to thousands of ebuilds? I don't see how we can realistically
hope for every developer to cooperate in making sure that their ebuilds
behave properly in "USE=-test" situation.

Virgil

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] use.desc: Improve description of USE=test

[Kent Fredric]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 870 bytes --]

On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 10:27:01 -0400
Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org> wrote:

> If you want to define behavior that can be relied upon in ebuilds, it
> should be specified in PMS. PMS does not define any meaning for the
> "test" USE flag.

We should eschew idealism about how the world *should* behave, and avoid
making portage a steaming garbage heap in order to comply with a
terrible PMS specification of a heavily used feature.

And we should aim to make this design less crappy in some future EAPI.

And honestly, I've hated the fact we implement test dependencies via:

DEPENDS="test? ( ... )" for so long, its an obvious hack, a terrible
one at that.

I just haven't seen any good proposals for an alternative, let alone
one that got penned up for a future EAPI.

But lets not make portage *worse* while we wait for this imaginary
future.


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

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] use.desc: Improve description of USE=test

[Mike Gilbert]

On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 10:37 AM Virgil Dupras <vdupras@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 10:27:01 -0400
> Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 9:23 AM Kent Fredric <kentnl@gentoo.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 22:29:29 -0400
> > > Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Setting RESTRICT="!test? ( test )" is generally sufficient.
> > >
> > > But that would require setting that virtually *everything* that has
> > > both tests, and required dependencies for tests.
> > >
> > > Which, in my experience, is practically everything with tests.
> > >
> > > To the point it seems like that should be the *default* mechanic,
> > > not a requirement that everyone pay not to have a randomly broken
> > > package.
> >
> > If you want to define behavior that can be relied upon in ebuilds, it
> > should be specified in PMS. PMS does not define any meaning for the
> > "test" USE flag.
> >
>
> Which is the easiest path, updating the PMS or adding RESTRICT="!test?
> ( test )" to thousands of ebuilds? I don't see how we can realistically
> hope for every developer to cooperate in making sure that their ebuilds
> behave properly in "USE=-test" situation.

Updates to PMS happen infrequently, and generally only introduce
behavioral changes in new EAPIs.

Adding RESTRICT to ebuilds does not need to happen overnight; setting
FEATURES=test still does the right thing for most people, assuming
they haven't done something stupid like setting USE=-test in
make.conf.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] use.desc: Improve description of USE=test

[Mike Gilbert]

On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 10:45 AM Kent Fredric <kentnl@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 10:27:01 -0400
> Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> > If you want to define behavior that can be relied upon in ebuilds, it
> > should be specified in PMS. PMS does not define any meaning for the
> > "test" USE flag.
>
> We should eschew idealism about how the world *should* behave, and avoid
> making portage a steaming garbage heap in order to comply with a
> terrible PMS specification of a heavily used feature.

Portage still works just fine for most people who would enable
FEATURES=test. Stop exaggerating.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] use.desc: Improve description of USE=test

[Francesco Riosa]

Il 24/08/18 19:08, Mike Gilbert ha scritto:
> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 10:45 AM Kent Fredric <kentnl@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 10:27:01 -0400
>> Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>
>>> If you want to define behavior that can be relied upon in ebuilds, it
>>> should be specified in PMS. PMS does not define any meaning for the
>>> "test" USE flag.
>> We should eschew idealism about how the world *should* behave, and avoid
>> making portage a steaming garbage heap in order to comply with a
>> terrible PMS specification of a heavily used feature.
> Portage still works just fine for most people who would enable
> FEATURES=test. Stop exaggerating.
>
People enabling FEATURES=test on most but not all packages had some
troubles and they need to disable them in both package.{env,use}
I'd like to have a flag to reinstate the previous portage behaviour, but
that's probably too late

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] use.desc: Improve description of USE=test

[Zac Medico]

On 08/24/2018 04:14 PM, Francesco Riosa wrote:
> 
> Il 24/08/18 19:08, Mike Gilbert ha scritto:
>> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 10:45 AM Kent Fredric <kentnl@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 10:27:01 -0400
>>> Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> If you want to define behavior that can be relied upon in ebuilds, it
>>>> should be specified in PMS. PMS does not define any meaning for the
>>>> "test" USE flag.
>>> We should eschew idealism about how the world *should* behave, and avoid
>>> making portage a steaming garbage heap in order to comply with a
>>> terrible PMS specification of a heavily used feature.
>> Portage still works just fine for most people who would enable
>> FEATURES=test. Stop exaggerating.
>>
> People enabling FEATURES=test on most but not all packages had some
> troubles and they need to disable them in both package.{env,use}
> I'd like to have a flag to reinstate the previous portage behaviour, but
> that's probably too late

Would a FEATURES setting that implies RESTRICT="!test? ( test )" for all
ebuilds do what you want?
-- 
Thanks,
Zac

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] use.desc: Improve description of USE=test

[Francesco Riosa]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1451 bytes --]

Il giorno sab 25 ago 2018 alle ore 01:45 Zac Medico <zmedico@gentoo.org> ha
scritto:

> On 08/24/2018 04:14 PM, Francesco Riosa wrote:
> >
> > Il 24/08/18 19:08, Mike Gilbert ha scritto:
> >> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 10:45 AM Kent Fredric <kentnl@gentoo.org>
> wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 10:27:01 -0400
> >>> Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> If you want to define behavior that can be relied upon in ebuilds, it
> >>>> should be specified in PMS. PMS does not define any meaning for the
> >>>> "test" USE flag.
> >>> We should eschew idealism about how the world *should* behave, and
> avoid
> >>> making portage a steaming garbage heap in order to comply with a
> >>> terrible PMS specification of a heavily used feature.
> >> Portage still works just fine for most people who would enable
> >> FEATURES=test. Stop exaggerating.
> >>
> > People enabling FEATURES=test on most but not all packages had some
> > troubles and they need to disable them in both package.{env,use}
> > I'd like to have a flag to reinstate the previous portage behaviour, but
> > that's probably too late
>
> Would a FEATURES setting that implies RESTRICT="!test? ( test )" for all
> ebuilds do what you want?
>

"want" is too much,
but it would have been pleasant to have something to keep portage
dependancies working as before.
"testrespectuse" or "usetestrespectfeatures" come to mind or another
command line option.




> --
> Thanks,
> Zac
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2261 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] use.desc: Improve description of USE=test

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1245 bytes --]

On Sat, 2018-08-25 at 01:14 +0200, Francesco Riosa wrote:
> Il 24/08/18 19:08, Mike Gilbert ha scritto:
> > On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 10:45 AM Kent Fredric <kentnl@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > > On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 10:27:01 -0400
> > > Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > If you want to define behavior that can be relied upon in ebuilds, it
> > > > should be specified in PMS. PMS does not define any meaning for the
> > > > "test" USE flag.
> > > 
> > > We should eschew idealism about how the world *should* behave, and avoid
> > > making portage a steaming garbage heap in order to comply with a
> > > terrible PMS specification of a heavily used feature.
> > 
> > Portage still works just fine for most people who would enable
> > FEATURES=test. Stop exaggerating.
> > 
> 
> People enabling FEATURES=test on most but not all packages had some
> troubles and they need to disable them in both package.{env,use}
> I'd like to have a flag to reinstate the previous portage behaviour, but
> that's probably too late
> 

That was a bug in Portage and AFAIK it has been fixed.  It would be nice
if people didn't add extra hacks to workaround bugs that no longer
exist.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 963 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] use.desc: Improve description of USE=test

[Jeroen Roovers]

     Hi Kent,


On Sat, 25 Aug 2018 01:23:06 +1200
Kent Fredric <kentnl@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 22:29:29 -0400
> Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
> > Setting RESTRICT="!test? ( test )" is generally sufficient.  
> 
> But that would require setting that virtually *everything* that has
> both tests, and required dependencies for tests.

Oh, 2012 just called.

> Which, in my experience, is practically everything with tests.
> 
> To the point it seems like that should be the *default* mechanic, not
> a requirement that everyone pay not to have a randomly broken package.

"
  [S]etting FEATUTES=-test USE=-test means rebuilding a lot of the
  installed packages. Instead, since USE=test is special already (it
  should only affect what happens in src_test(), right?) we might as
  well disable the test phase, tell the user in einfo, and be done with
  it. We could even write that to vdb so that on the next run, the
  package is re-emerged but with src_test() getting run properly this
  time.
"

https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=417675


Kind regards,
     jer

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] use.desc: Improve description of USE=test

[Zac Medico]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2534 bytes --]

On 08/24/2018 04:56 PM, Francesco Riosa wrote:
> 
> 
> Il giorno sab 25 ago 2018 alle ore 01:45 Zac Medico <zmedico@gentoo.org
> <mailto:zmedico@gentoo.org>> ha scritto:
> 
>     On 08/24/2018 04:14 PM, Francesco Riosa wrote:
>     >
>     > Il 24/08/18 19:08, Mike Gilbert ha scritto:
>     >> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 10:45 AM Kent Fredric <kentnl@gentoo.org
>     <mailto:kentnl@gentoo.org>> wrote:
>     >>> On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 10:27:01 -0400
>     >>> Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org <mailto:floppym@gentoo.org>> wrote:
>     >>>
>     >>>> If you want to define behavior that can be relied upon in
>     ebuilds, it
>     >>>> should be specified in PMS. PMS does not define any meaning for the
>     >>>> "test" USE flag.
>     >>> We should eschew idealism about how the world *should* behave,
>     and avoid
>     >>> making portage a steaming garbage heap in order to comply with a
>     >>> terrible PMS specification of a heavily used feature.
>     >> Portage still works just fine for most people who would enable
>     >> FEATURES=test. Stop exaggerating.
>     >>
>     > People enabling FEATURES=test on most but not all packages had some
>     > troubles and they need to disable them in both package.{env,use}
>     > I'd like to have a flag to reinstate the previous portage
>     behaviour, but
>     > that's probably too late
> 
>     Would a FEATURES setting that implies RESTRICT="!test? ( test )" for all
>     ebuilds do what you want?
> 
> 
> "want" is too much,
> but it would have been pleasant to have something to keep portage
> dependancies working as before.
> "testrespectuse" or "usetestrespectfeatures" come to mind or another
> command line option.

Maybe you are not using the latest version of portage? The current
behavior with sys-apps/portage-2.3.48 seems pretty sane to me, for
example see this behavior with dev-python/setuptools-40.0.0 which has
empty RESTRICT:

$ emerge -pvq --nodeps setuptools
[ebuild   R   ] dev-python/setuptools-40.0.0  USE="-test" PYTHON_TARGETS="pypy pypy3 python2_7 python3_4 python3_5 python3_6 python3_7" 
$ FEATURES=test emerge -pvq --nodeps setuptools
[ebuild   R   ] dev-python/setuptools-40.0.0  USE="test*" PYTHON_TARGETS="pypy pypy3 python2_7 python3_4 python3_5 python3_6 python3_7" 
$ FEATURES=test USE=-test emerge -pvq --nodeps setuptools
[ebuild   R   ] dev-python/setuptools-40.0.0  USE="-test" PYTHON_TARGETS="pypy pypy3 python2_7 python3_4 python3_5 python3_6 python3_7" 
-- 
Thanks,
Zac


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

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] use.desc: Improve description of USE=test

[Zac Medico]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2807 bytes --]

On 08/26/2018 12:14 AM, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 08/24/2018 04:56 PM, Francesco Riosa wrote:
>>
>>
>> Il giorno sab 25 ago 2018 alle ore 01:45 Zac Medico <zmedico@gentoo.org
>> <mailto:zmedico@gentoo.org>> ha scritto:
>>
>>     On 08/24/2018 04:14 PM, Francesco Riosa wrote:
>>     >
>>     > Il 24/08/18 19:08, Mike Gilbert ha scritto:
>>     >> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 10:45 AM Kent Fredric <kentnl@gentoo.org
>>     <mailto:kentnl@gentoo.org>> wrote:
>>     >>> On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 10:27:01 -0400
>>     >>> Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org <mailto:floppym@gentoo.org>> wrote:
>>     >>>
>>     >>>> If you want to define behavior that can be relied upon in
>>     ebuilds, it
>>     >>>> should be specified in PMS. PMS does not define any meaning for the
>>     >>>> "test" USE flag.
>>     >>> We should eschew idealism about how the world *should* behave,
>>     and avoid
>>     >>> making portage a steaming garbage heap in order to comply with a
>>     >>> terrible PMS specification of a heavily used feature.
>>     >> Portage still works just fine for most people who would enable
>>     >> FEATURES=test. Stop exaggerating.
>>     >>
>>     > People enabling FEATURES=test on most but not all packages had some
>>     > troubles and they need to disable them in both package.{env,use}
>>     > I'd like to have a flag to reinstate the previous portage
>>     behaviour, but
>>     > that's probably too late
>>
>>     Would a FEATURES setting that implies RESTRICT="!test? ( test )" for all
>>     ebuilds do what you want?
>>
>>
>> "want" is too much,
>> but it would have been pleasant to have something to keep portage
>> dependancies working as before.
>> "testrespectuse" or "usetestrespectfeatures" come to mind or another
>> command line option.
> 
> Maybe you are not using the latest version of portage? The current
> behavior with sys-apps/portage-2.3.48 seems pretty sane to me, for
> example see this behavior with dev-python/setuptools-40.0.0 which has
> empty RESTRICT:
> 
> $ emerge -pvq --nodeps setuptools
> [ebuild   R   ] dev-python/setuptools-40.0.0  USE="-test" PYTHON_TARGETS="pypy pypy3 python2_7 python3_4 python3_5 python3_6 python3_7" 
> $ FEATURES=test emerge -pvq --nodeps setuptools
> [ebuild   R   ] dev-python/setuptools-40.0.0  USE="test*" PYTHON_TARGETS="pypy pypy3 python2_7 python3_4 python3_5 python3_6 python3_7" 
> $ FEATURES=test USE=-test emerge -pvq --nodeps setuptools
> [ebuild   R   ] dev-python/setuptools-40.0.0  USE="-test" PYTHON_TARGETS="pypy pypy3 python2_7 python3_4 python3_5 python3_6 python3_7" 

Oh, I see that src_test runs even with USE=-test there, so I see why
people are complaining. Anyway, an implicit RESTRICT="!test? ( test )"
setting would solve that.
-- 
Thanks,
Zac


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