[gentoo-dev] Modular X porting: dependency changes

[gentoo-dev] Modular X porting: dependency changes

[Donnie Berkholz]

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

Because portage treats the default virtual differently than I was
previously led to believe, everybody who's ported a package to modular X
so far will need to make a small change.

It's really easy, but it might take a bit of time to go through your
packages.

Here's the change:
	"virtual/x11" -> "<=x11-base/xorg-x11-6.99"

This is because portage doesn't do a sanity check for the PROVIDES flag
on the default provider of a virtual.

Thanks for your time,
Donnie
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDgjMVXVaO67S1rtsRAoJqAKDkyxtwzvqeYuuOntKldJWsOIcl6wCgspF9
/R1BEbiiQ34/KHsDag1LOlE=
=uZeU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Modular X porting: dependency changes

[Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 440 bytes --]

On Monday 21 November 2005 21:50, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Here's the change:
>         "virtual/x11" -> "<=x11-base/xorg-x11-6.99"
Is this the last change? :)
Just to make sure, I received the broken pieces of the "old" method, so I 
don't really want to take them from the new one, too ;)

-- 
Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/
Gentoo/ALT lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, AMD64, Sound, PAM, KDE

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Modular X porting: dependency changes

[Donnie Berkholz]

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

Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
| On Monday 21 November 2005 21:50, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
|
|>Here's the change:
|>        "virtual/x11" -> "<=x11-base/xorg-x11-6.99"
|
| Is this the last change? :)
| Just to make sure, I received the broken pieces of the "old" method, so I
| don't really want to take them from the new one, too ;)

That will be purely determined by whether people encounter problems with
this change as well. =)

I hope every change is the last change, as far as this is concerned.

Thanks,
Donnie
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDgjgTXVaO67S1rtsRAkA2AJ9wBAGokTmbB8jB6lFgD32bxc6dKwCg9lNx
oxrzqHzVV2WFH1NDXMiubZM=
=Tz53
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Modular X porting: dependency changes

[Carsten Lohrke]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 186 bytes --]

On Monday 21 November 2005 21:50, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Here's the change:
> 	"virtual/x11" -> "<=x11-base/xorg-x11-6.99"

virtual/x11 isn't xorg for all profiles. 


Carsten

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Modular X porting: dependency changes

[Donnie Berkholz]

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

Carsten Lohrke wrote:
| On Monday 21 November 2005 21:50, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
|
|>Here's the change:
|>	"virtual/x11" -> "<=x11-base/xorg-x11-6.99"
|
|
| virtual/x11 isn't xorg for all profiles.

Perhaps the relevant people (macos?) could get in touch with me, and we
can figure out what needs to happen.

It may be that we'll need to add x11-base/apple-xfree into the || list
as well. Using the virtual is not an option right now, because of the
previously mentioned bug.

Thanks,
Donnie
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDgo1uXVaO67S1rtsRAjUZAKD3FlAeF06+xM6a8P7IzNMyD/GkQACguyFQ
1thol8iy6VRTRo0uaKWzogI=
=4pdd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Modular X porting: dependency changes

[Joshua Baergen]

Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> It may be that we'll need to add x11-base/apple-xfree into the || list
If the list keeps growing maybe we should consider a GLEP 37-style 
solution, like was suggested by Jason. It would allow us to make any 
further changes that are required (agreed, hopefully none) without 
having to change a bunch of packages in the tree.

--
Joshua Baergen
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Modular X porting: dependency changes

[Donnie Berkholz]

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

Joshua Baergen wrote:
| If the list keeps growing maybe we should consider a GLEP 37-style
| solution, like was suggested by Jason. It would allow us to make any
| further changes that are required (agreed, hopefully none) without
| having to change a bunch of packages in the tree.

OK, we might as well look into it to see whether it's something we can
get going within the next 2 weeks, which is about when 7.0 will be released.

Jason, could you help us out? I CC'd you to make sure you'd read this.

Thanks,
Donnie
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDgr4EXVaO67S1rtsRAleBAKDy8lXNdP8H1YHtzpYUsawqI+f95wCgp7r9
MlA9+EqCkvNyKcafSsKJwcc=
=Ike6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Modular X porting: dependency changes

[Grobian]

On 21-11-2005 19:15:58 -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> | virtual/x11 isn't xorg for all profiles.
> 
> Perhaps the relevant people (macos?) could get in touch with me, and we
> can figure out what needs to happen.
> 
> It may be that we'll need to add x11-base/apple-xfree into the || list
> as well. Using the virtual is not an option right now, because of the
> previously mentioned bug.

OSX doesn't have Xorg (yet?), so it would indeed cause some trouble for
us right now.  Since we're outnumbered here, I'd vote to make the
change that is compatible with the majority of users right now.  I'm
affraid it would just boil down to dropping the ppc-macos keyword on
those packages that get xorg dependency.  The mentioned || list is an
issue for more than xorg, so it should be considered some more IMHO.
Kito, can you agree with this, or do you have another 'solution'?

-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo for Mac OS X Project -- Interim Lead
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Modular X porting: dependency changes

[Doug Goldstein]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 666 bytes --]

Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Joshua Baergen wrote:
> | If the list keeps growing maybe we should consider a GLEP 37-style
> | solution, like was suggested by Jason. It would allow us to make any
> | further changes that are required (agreed, hopefully none) without
> | having to change a bunch of packages in the tree.
> 
I thought GLEP 37 was a way out kind of thing. Like several months if
not a year before it can be done.

Here's a horrible suggestion for if all else fails... have the
monolithic Xorg or xfree ebuilds PROVIDE the modular components. Then
only have modular depends in the tree.
-- 
Doug Goldstein <cardoe@gentoo.org>
http://dev.gentoo.org/~cardoe/

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Modular X porting: dependency changes

[Donnie Berkholz]

Doug Goldstein wrote:
> I thought GLEP 37 was a way out kind of thing. Like several months if
> not a year before it can be done.

I figured about the same, but 
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=112896#c16 begs to differ.

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Modular X porting: dependency changes

[Jason Stubbs]

On Wednesday 23 November 2005 00:46, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Doug Goldstein wrote:
> > I thought GLEP 37 was a way out kind of thing. Like several months if
> > not a year before it can be done.
>
> I figured about the same, but
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=112896#c16 begs to differ.

The glep was originally posted 30th April...

The idea was already fairly solid at that time and required minimal changes to 
portage for it to "just work". Pretty much only one actually - the hardcoded 
'sanity check' of not being able to install packages of category "virtual" 
was removed. Hence, as per the backwards compatibility section of the glep, 
all current portages are capable of handling virtuals that are regular 
packages. The largest holdup was waiting for backwards compatibility to 
become viable.

There are really only two other parts to the glep; consistency checking and 
user overrides. The current method of overriding will still work fine and 
only becomes an issue when the first virtual that covers a set of packages 
comes into existence. As for consistency checking, it has a relatively small 
chance of being useful in my opinion. Take the following:

# emerge virtual/x11
# emerge -C x11-base/xorg-x11
# emerge x11-libs/qt
(Whoops!)

In other words, it's a situtation that is possible already. The solution is to 
always use --deep when calculating dependencies, which I'm working on at the 
moment. There are a couple of other portage-side implementation issues that 
have come up, but the more difficult ones have become clearer over time. I'll 
dust of the GLEP and repost it later this week and see if we can't get it 
finalized...

--
Jason Stubbs
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Modular X porting: dependency changes

[Lina Pezzella]

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


On Nov 22, 2005, at 4:13 AM, Grobian wrote:

> On 21-11-2005 19:15:58 -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
>> | virtual/x11 isn't xorg for all profiles.
>>
>> Perhaps the relevant people (macos?) could get in touch with me,  
>> and we
>> can figure out what needs to happen.
>>
>> It may be that we'll need to add x11-base/apple-xfree into the ||  
>> list
>> as well. Using the virtual is not an option right now, because of the
>> previously mentioned bug.
>
> OSX doesn't have Xorg (yet?), so it would indeed cause some trouble  
> for
> us right now.  Since we're outnumbered here, I'd vote to make the
> change that is compatible with the majority of users right now.  I'm
> affraid it would just boil down to dropping the ppc-macos keyword on
> those packages that get xorg dependency.  The mentioned || list is an
> issue for more than xorg, so it should be considered some more IMHO.
> Kito, can you agree with this, or do you have another 'solution'?

I would want to know exactly how many keywords would be dropped with  
this solution. I would hate to see something that is working  
perfectly fine having support dropped due to syntax troubles in an  
ebuild...

- --Lina Pezzella
Gentoo Developer



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFDjmXGNJ9STR9DbYERAtx6AJ4qQG3fr80C5IAf9rxsMfSYFvuc0wCdEe5w
ca4WsabWZGsVEjmBrh2EcPE=
=wyJn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Modular X porting: dependency changes

[Donnie Berkholz]

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

Lina Pezzella wrote:
| I would want to know exactly how many keywords would be dropped with
| this solution. I would hate to see something that is working  perfectly
| fine having support dropped due to syntax troubles in an  ebuild...

Portage's lack of sanity checks is completely unrelated to syntax troubles.

As far as progress on this issue, we're looking into adopting glep 37
and creating a virtual/x11 ebuild to address this.

Thanks,
Donnie
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDjrDGXVaO67S1rtsRAg6KAKC6JnjB8FFilBiDqoIanbtEueYInwCdH08t
pUwf5CGiYrFd0v56Q2pZK9E=
=BSLt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Modular X porting: dependency changes

[Donnie Berkholz]

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

Donnie Berkholz wrote:
| As far as progress on this issue, we're looking into adopting glep 37
| and creating a virtual/x11 ebuild to address this.

I've just committed virtual/x11 to the tree. See
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=112896 if you run into any
problems with it.

It won't work properly with macos yet because they use a "fake" package,
so they'll have to hang on to virtual/x11 in the profiles.

I plan to remove the virtual/x11 definition from base/virtuals in a
couple of days, because this should provide a full (and non-broken)
replacement.

To return to the original issue, this means the "virtual/x11" remains
the correct way to specify modular dependencies and "<=6.99" should not
be used.

Thanks,
Donnie
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDlpdFXVaO67S1rtsRAjhcAKDNT1Y+SeZvx6pXxHk5MC4Fr4nxhgCeNw1e
HAXKaKYVrFbfipv0taBqLJ4=
=RNhi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Modular X porting: dependency changes

[Jason Stubbs]

On Wednesday 07 December 2005 17:03, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> | As far as progress on this issue, we're looking into adopting glep 37
> | and creating a virtual/x11 ebuild to address this.
>
> I've just committed virtual/x11 to the tree. See
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=112896 if you run into any
> problems with it.
>
> It won't work properly with macos yet because they use a "fake" package,
> so they'll have to hang on to virtual/x11 in the profiles.

It should work if the listed package matches what the macos profiles have in 
package.provided...

> I plan to remove the virtual/x11 definition from base/virtuals in a
> couple of days, because this should provide a full (and non-broken)
> replacement.

This can be easily tested in advance by adding the following:

# cat /etc/portage/profile/virtuals
virtual/x11     -*

--
Jason Stubbs
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Modular X porting: dependency changes

[Donnie Berkholz]

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

Jason Stubbs wrote:
| On Wednesday 07 December 2005 17:03, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
|
|>Donnie Berkholz wrote:
|>| As far as progress on this issue, we're looking into adopting glep 37
|>| and creating a virtual/x11 ebuild to address this.
|>
|>I've just committed virtual/x11 to the tree. See
|>https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=112896 if you run into any
|>problems with it.
|>
|>It won't work properly with macos yet because they use a "fake" package,
|>so they'll have to hang on to virtual/x11 in the profiles.
|
|
| It should work if the listed package matches what the macos profiles
have in
| package.provided...

Please do try adding the section and running repoman, then, from an x86
profile.

|>I plan to remove the virtual/x11 definition from base/virtuals in a
|>couple of days, because this should provide a full (and non-broken)
|>replacement.
|
|
| This can be easily tested in advance by adding the following:
|
| # cat /etc/portage/profile/virtuals
| virtual/x11     -*

Well, I've already tested locally by just removing the line from
base/virtuals. But yes, that does sound like a nice, non-overwritable
way to do it. =)

Thanks,
Donnie
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDlyPtXVaO67S1rtsRAunBAJoD0hJmFdnrxGghdpusrvGqHXgAIACdESjv
Kwx4QY+EOdteHzyXaxrfzYE=
=xrrk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Modular X porting: dependency changes

[Donnie Berkholz]

Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> I plan to remove the virtual/x11 definition from base/virtuals in a
> couple of days, because this should provide a full (and non-broken)
> replacement.

Done.

I will probably do similar for the other x11 virtuals (particularly xft) 
soon, assuming this doesn't break too badly.

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