[gentoo-dev] use.defaults and pointless commits

[gentoo-dev] use.defaults and pointless commits

[Jakub Moc]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1257 bytes --]

Hello everyone,

would someone more competent explain to me, why

- this feature even exists
- why has a mass of things been commited in there recently

?

It's

- confusing users
- rendering /etc/portage/package.keywords useless (install a dep for one
particular ebuild and enjoy the USE flag enabled globally)
- causing unwanted results (I did not really install app-text/recode for the
purpose of enabling USE=recode globally and make it clash with half of php USE
flags e.g.)
- causing pointless breakage/bailing out in current ebuilds for users that have
not touched USE flags on their system at all

Related links:

http://viewcvstest.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo-x86/profiles/base/use.defaults?r1=1.22&r2=1.23
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=112074
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=86687#c7

Suggested solution: remove use.defaults feature from portage; meanwhile, stop
adding stuff in there. It gains nothing, just confuses people and breaks
things.

Thanks.

-- 
Best regards,

 Jakub Moc
 mailto:jakub@gentoo.org
 GPG signature: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E
 Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95  B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E

 ... still no signature ;)

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 183 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: use.defaults and pointless commits

[Jakub Moc]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 342 bytes --]


18.11.2005, 16:33:08, Jakub Moc wrote:

> - rendering /etc/portage/package.keywords useless (install a dep for one
> particular ebuild and enjoy the USE flag enabled globally) - causing unwanted
> results (I did not really install app-text/recode for the purpose of enabling

Err, /etc/portage/package.use of course...


--
jakub

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 183 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] use.defaults and pointless commits

[Donnie Berkholz]

Jakub Moc wrote:
> would someone more competent explain to me, why
> 
> - this feature even exists

It makes sense to enable support for packages you have installed. This 
should be the default behavior, and it should require manually disabling.

Thanks,
Donnie
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] punting the use.defaults feature

[Mike Frysinger]

On Fri, Nov 18, 2005 at 04:33:08PM +0100, Jakub Moc wrote:
> would someone more competent explain to me, why

you approached this all wrong ... you were supposed to say something
like "can we get rid of this hidden feature please"

i see no reason to keep use.defaults around anymore, i think the rest
of our config/profile system covers for it adequately and in a manner
that doesnt confused people

> - this feature even exists

it made sense when it was designed ... back in the much, much older
days of portage

> - why has a mass of things been commited in there recently

because they belong there

> - confusing users

the file has always confused people, whether they be user or dev

> - rendering /etc/portage/package.keywords useless (install a dep for one
> particular ebuild and enjoy the USE flag enabled globally)

unrelated

> - causing unwanted results (I did not really install app-text/recode for the
> purpose of enabling USE=recode globally and make it clash with half of php USE
> flags e.g.)
> - causing pointless breakage/bailing out in current ebuilds for users that have
> not touched USE flags on their system at all

you're confusing "feature" with "bug" ;)
-mike
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re[2]: [gentoo-dev] punting the use.defaults feature

[Jakub Moc]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1988 bytes --]


18.11.2005, 16:43:12, Mike Frysinger wrote:

> i see no reason to keep use.defaults around anymore, i think the rest of our
> config/profile system covers for it adequately and in a manner that doesnt
> confused people

Also, IIRC, saner alternatives have been suggested, like IUSE="+bleh" to enable
a use flag by default on a per-ebuild basis; use.defaults is something well
hidden from users, and USE flags automagically appearing/disappering after
emerge sync/installing an ebuild cause a lot of confusion.

>> - why has a mass of things been commited in there recently

> because they belong there

and break things/confuse people? What exactly is the benefit from this? Sorry,
I've apparently missed something, since I can't see much sense in committing
something just because it "belongs there"... Did not notice any call for adding
all that stuff either; actually - it's been done after someone requested to
remove one particular thing from use.defaults.

>> - confusing users

> the file has always confused people, whether they be user or dev

One more reason to get rid of it... :)

>> - rendering /etc/portage/package.keywords useless (install a dep for one
>> particular ebuild and enjoy the USE flag enabled globally)

> unrelated

Well, I don't think so... If I want to enable a feature for one specific ebuild
and a USE flag in /etc/portage/package.use pulls in a dep, that in turn enables
that use flag globally, it's obviously not what I intended and forces me to add
yet another -flag into make.conf

>> - causing unwanted results (I did not really install app-text/recode for the
>> purpose of enabling USE=recode globally and make it clash with half of php USE
>> flags e.g.)
>> - causing pointless breakage/bailing out in current ebuilds for users that have
>> not touched USE flags on their system at all

> you're confusing "feature" with "bug" ;)

I actually consider this feature to be a bug... :=)


--
jakub

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 183 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] punting the use.defaults feature

[Drake Wyrm]

Jakub Moc <jakub@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Well, I don't think so... If I want to enable a feature for one
> specific ebuild and a USE flag in /etc/portage/package.use pulls in a
> dep, that in turn enables that use flag globally, it's obviously not
> what I intended and forces me to add yet another -flag into make.conf

If you don't want portage to employ dark magic in guessing which use
flags you want enabled, don't let it. Specify your use flags explicitly.

Put USE="-* oneuse twouse reduse blueuse" in make.conf to set the
globals, and _then_ start tweaking in "package.use".


-- 
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^ A unix signature isn't a return address, it's the ASCII equivalent of ^
^ a black velvet clown painting. It's a rectangle of carets surrounding ^
^ a quote from a literary giant of weeniedom like Heinlein or Dr. Who.  ^
^   -- Chris Maeda                                                      ^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] punting the use.defaults feature

[Ciaran McCreesh]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1016 bytes --]

On Fri, 18 Nov 2005 11:18:58 -0800 Drake Wyrm <wyrm@haell.com> wrote:
| Jakub Moc <jakub@gentoo.org> wrote:
| > Well, I don't think so... If I want to enable a feature for one
| > specific ebuild and a USE flag in /etc/portage/package.use pulls in
| > a dep, that in turn enables that use flag globally, it's obviously
| > not what I intended and forces me to add yet another -flag into
| > make.conf
| 
| If you don't want portage to employ dark magic in guessing which use
| flags you want enabled, don't let it. Specify your use flags
| explicitly.
| 
| Put USE="-* oneuse twouse reduse blueuse" in make.conf to set the
| globals, and _then_ start tweaking in "package.use".

...and then watch your system explode because you didn't set various
USE flags which should only be turned off on embedded systems.

use.defaults is bad, mkay?

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Look! Shiny things!)
Mail            : ciaranm at gentoo.org
Web             : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm


[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] punting the use.defaults feature

[Kurt Lieber]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 604 bytes --]

On Fri, Nov 18, 2005 at 07:31:30PM +0000 or thereabouts, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> | Put USE="-* oneuse twouse reduse blueuse" in make.conf to set the
> | globals, and _then_ start tweaking in "package.use".
> 
> ...and then watch your system explode because you didn't set various
> USE flags which should only be turned off on embedded systems.

We've been using the USE="-* foo bar" method on all of our infrastructure
servers since as far back as I can remember and have never had a problem as
a result.

Not trying to fan the flames one way or the other -- just stating a fact.

--kurt

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] punting the use.defaults feature

[Ciaran McCreesh]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 661 bytes --]

On Fri, 18 Nov 2005 19:45:25 +0000 Kurt Lieber <klieber@gentoo.org>
wrote:
| We've been using the USE="-* foo bar" method on all of our
| infrastructure servers since as far back as I can remember and have
| never had a problem as a result.
| 
| Not trying to fan the flames one way or the other -- just stating a
| fact.

Sure, because a) you're careful, b) you know what you're doing and c)
it used to be the case that no* USE flags were used for "stuff that
really should usually be on".

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Look! Shiny things!)
Mail            : ciaranm at gentoo.org
Web             : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm


[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re[2]: [gentoo-dev] punting the use.defaults feature

[Jakub Moc]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


18.11.2005, 20:18:58, Drake Wyrm wrote:

> Jakub Moc <jakub@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> Well, I don't think so... If I want to enable a feature for one
>> specific ebuild and a USE flag in /etc/portage/package.use pulls in a
>> dep, that in turn enables that use flag globally, it's obviously not
>> what I intended and forces me to add yet another -flag into make.conf

> If you don't want portage to employ dark magic in guessing which use
> flags you want enabled, don't let it. Specify your use flags explicitly.

> Put USE="-* oneuse twouse reduse blueuse" in make.conf to set the
> globals, and _then_ start tweaking in "package.use".


No. That just does not make any sense. We are enabling default flags in
profiles only to force users to do -* and reinvent the wheel?


- --
jakub
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)

iD8DBQFDfjTXhxfV/c66PZ4RAoxCAJwMBc3jqUoelsFRiIe0ptbwe9NWqgCeMyLw
WSWg09q/ZdiRfqVqqjFQBlI=
=ZE+p
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] punting the use.defaults feature

[Zac Medico]

Drake Wyrm wrote:
> Jakub Moc <jakub@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
>>Well, I don't think so... If I want to enable a feature for one
>>specific ebuild and a USE flag in /etc/portage/package.use pulls in a
>>dep, that in turn enables that use flag globally, it's obviously not
>>what I intended and forces me to add yet another -flag into make.conf
> 
> 
> If you don't want portage to employ dark magic in guessing which use
> flags you want enabled, don't let it. Specify your use flags explicitly.
> 
> Put USE="-* oneuse twouse reduse blueuse" in make.conf to set the
> globals, and _then_ start tweaking in "package.use".
> 
> 

A little known alternative is to set USE_ORDER in make.conf (see make.conf.5).  If you remove "auto" from the default USE_ORDER="env:pkg:conf:auto:defaults" then autouse is disabled.  Then enemy is not use.defaults, but unexpected autouse.

Zac
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] punting the use.defaults feature

[Mike Frysinger]

On Fri, Nov 18, 2005 at 11:18:58AM -0800, Drake Wyrm wrote:
> Jakub Moc <jakub@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > Well, I don't think so... If I want to enable a feature for one
> > specific ebuild and a USE flag in /etc/portage/package.use pulls in a
> > dep, that in turn enables that use flag globally, it's obviously not
> > what I intended and forces me to add yet another -flag into make.conf
> 
> If you don't want portage to employ dark magic in guessing which use
> flags you want enabled, don't let it. Specify your use flags explicitly.

or we can just remove the dark magic and be done with it

use.defaults is almost like letting ./configure scripts auto detect
settings on the fly imho
-mike
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] punting the use.defaults feature

[Michael Marineau]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1279 bytes --]

Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2005 at 11:18:58AM -0800, Drake Wyrm wrote:
> 
>>Jakub Moc <jakub@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>
>>>Well, I don't think so... If I want to enable a feature for one
>>>specific ebuild and a USE flag in /etc/portage/package.use pulls in a
>>>dep, that in turn enables that use flag globally, it's obviously not
>>>what I intended and forces me to add yet another -flag into make.conf
>>
>>If you don't want portage to employ dark magic in guessing which use
>>flags you want enabled, don't let it. Specify your use flags explicitly.
> 
> 
> or we can just remove the dark magic and be done with it
> 
> use.defaults is almost like letting ./configure scripts auto detect
> settings on the fly imho
> -mike

I'll put in another vote against dark magic.

However changing this will also lead to many supprises and tick off many
users who don't know why a bunch of flags just vanished. How about we
leave the feature in portage but remove auto from USE_ORDER in the
2006.0 profile and put a note about the changed behaviour the release
announcements.  For users who do like the functionality just properly
document the existance of USE_ORDER in the install guide.

-- 
Michael Marineau
marineam@gentoo.org
Gentoo Linux Developer
Oregon State University

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 256 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] punting the use.defaults feature

[Spider (D.m.D. Lj.)]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1502 bytes --]

On Sun, 2005-11-20 at 11:55 -0800, Michael Marineau wrote:

> However changing this will also lead to many supprises and tick off many
> users who don't know why a bunch of flags just vanished. How about we
> leave the feature in portage but remove auto from USE_ORDER in the
> 2006.0 profile and put a note about the changed behaviour the release
> announcements.  For users who do like the functionality just properly
> document the existance of USE_ORDER in the install guide.

*applauds*

Sensibility as well as an un-breaking upgrade path!  Finally we see
thought in this area ; )

Documenting this would be great.  However, I'd -also- want the
IUSE="+auto -bongodrums alpha beta +zeta"  to be set, perhaps with a new
USE_ORDER variable ":ebuild:" ?  


The dark magic was a very good and usable approach, however with the
growth of our tree, it has seen its use and it may well be time to phase
it out in favour of a more fine-grained mechanism.

Adding and documenting a "recommended enable" set, would be a great
start.  It could also be used to fine-tune packages for the GRP set, in
order to do partial on/off settings based on the parts that the
maintainers consider "good and reasonable"

I know one place where I'd love to see this is fex. the various
multimedia backends,  openssl/gnutls  among other such settings.



//Spider


-- 
begin  .signature
Tortured users / Laughing in pain
See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information.
end


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] punting the use.defaults feature

[Thomas de Grenier de Latour]

On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 23:23:19 +0100
"Spider (D.m.D. Lj.)" <spider@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Sun, 2005-11-20 at 11:55 -0800, Michael Marineau wrote:
> 
> > For users who do like the functionality just properly document
> > the existance of USE_ORDER in the install guide.
> 
> However, I'd -also- want the IUSE="+auto -bongodrums alpha beta
> +zeta"  to be set, perhaps with a new USE_ORDER variable
> ":ebuild:" ?  

Imho, that's the problem with documenting USE_ORDER (although
it's a minor one): if a user set USE_ORDER="env:pkg:conf:defaults"
in his make.conf and a later version of portage introduces some new
interesting value, he will miss this new feature without noticing.

Since it seems that the common usage of user-defined USE_ORDER is
to remove values, but not actually to change their priorities
(probably because the default ones are the only ones which really
make sense), i would rather see a split in two distinct vars:
 - FOO (i'm not good to invent names) would be portage internal
and define valid values and their respective priorities.
 - BAR would be accessible to the users as an incremental var, and
would define what values should be taken into account.

FOO default would be "env:pkg:conf:auto:defaults".
BAR default would be "auto conf default env pkg".

This way, users could set BAR="-auto" in make.conf, which would
really mean "take all of the default USE_ORDER but the auto thing".
And the day "ebuild" or any other new feature is implemented, this
user will have it automatically (just like he would get any new
enabled-by-default FEATURES flag for instance).

--
TGL.
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] punting the use.defaults feature

[Marius Mauch]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2185 bytes --]

On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 00:06:38 +0100
Thomas de Grenier de Latour <degrenier@easyconnect.fr> wrote:

> On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 23:23:19 +0100
> "Spider (D.m.D. Lj.)" <spider@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, 2005-11-20 at 11:55 -0800, Michael Marineau wrote:
> > 
> > > For users who do like the functionality just properly document
> > > the existance of USE_ORDER in the install guide.
> > 
> > However, I'd -also- want the IUSE="+auto -bongodrums alpha beta
> > +zeta"  to be set, perhaps with a new USE_ORDER variable
> > ":ebuild:" ?  
> 
> Imho, that's the problem with documenting USE_ORDER (although
> it's a minor one): if a user set USE_ORDER="env:pkg:conf:defaults"
> in his make.conf and a later version of portage introduces some new
> interesting value, he will miss this new feature without noticing.
> 
> Since it seems that the common usage of user-defined USE_ORDER is
> to remove values, but not actually to change their priorities
> (probably because the default ones are the only ones which really
> make sense), i would rather see a split in two distinct vars:
>  - FOO (i'm not good to invent names) would be portage internal
> and define valid values and their respective priorities.
>  - BAR would be accessible to the users as an incremental var, and
> would define what values should be taken into account.
> 
> FOO default would be "env:pkg:conf:auto:defaults".
> BAR default would be "auto conf default env pkg".
> 
> This way, users could set BAR="-auto" in make.conf, which would
> really mean "take all of the default USE_ORDER but the auto thing".
> And the day "ebuild" or any other new feature is implemented, this
> user will have it automatically (just like he would get any new
> enabled-by-default FEATURES flag for instance).

Personally I'd just kill auto-use support in the next "big" portage
upgrade (and USE_ORDER with it as disabling auto-use is the only
real application of it that I'm aware of).

Marius

-- 
Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub

In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be
Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] punting the use.defaults feature

[Mike Frysinger]

On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 07:22:42PM +0100, Marius Mauch wrote:
> Personally I'd just kill auto-use support in the next "big" portage
> upgrade (and USE_ORDER with it as disabling auto-use is the only
> real application of it that I'm aware of).

works for me
-mike
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list