From: "Petteri Räty" <betelgeuse@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] Unused ebuild built_with_use cleanup
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 15:12:47 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4AE6F1CF.1030408@gentoo.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m3ocntivwj.fsf@lugabout.jhcloos.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1185 bytes --]
James Cloos wrote:
>>>>>> "Petteri" == Petteri Räty <betelgeuse@gentoo.org> writes:
>
> Petteri> Their maintainers should be active and switch their ebuilds to
> Petteri> EAPI 2. If they don't have an active maintainer, then do we
> Petteri> want to keep live ebuilds for them around?
>
> What possible benefit could be had from dropping ebuilds for no other
> reason than their EAPI?
>
The goal is to eventually get rid of built_with_use.
>
> Your initial post indicated that you only wanted to drop ebuilds which
> were unlikely to be in use by users. Given the fact that most (all?)
> live ebuilds are masked, any automated tests for the likelyhood that
> an ebuild is in active use will, by definition, have false negatives
> when dealing with live ebuilds. (Where false negative means unlikely
> to be in use even though it, in fact, is in use.)
>
If you read the code I attached you will see that the reason live
ebuilds show up in there is because adjutrix -U puts them to the list
because they don't have any keywords. It follows my original reasoning
that for live ebuilds the solution is to migrate them to EAPI 2.
Regards,
Petteri
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 262 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-27 13:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-09-29 13:32 [gentoo-dev] Unused ebuild built_with_use cleanup Petteri Räty
2009-10-07 11:21 ` Marijn Schouten (hkBst)
2009-10-08 21:29 ` Petteri Räty
2009-10-07 11:54 ` Stelian Ionescu
2009-10-08 21:34 ` Petteri Räty
2009-10-08 22:03 ` Jeremy Olexa
2009-10-08 22:22 ` Petteri Räty
2009-10-09 0:17 ` Patrick Lauer
2009-10-09 13:38 ` Petteri Räty
2009-10-08 22:25 ` Tomáš Chvátal
2009-10-09 13:41 ` Petteri Räty
2009-10-24 12:32 ` [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] " Petteri Räty
2009-10-24 20:29 ` James Cloos
2009-10-25 9:48 ` Petteri Räty
2009-10-26 23:21 ` James Cloos
2009-10-27 13:12 ` Petteri Räty [this message]
2009-10-27 6:07 ` Ryan Hill
2009-10-27 7:02 ` Mike Frysinger
2009-10-27 13:09 ` Petteri Räty
2009-10-27 13:46 ` Mike Frysinger
2009-10-27 18:46 ` Petteri Räty
2009-10-28 2:31 ` [gentoo-dev] " Mike Frysinger
2009-10-28 9:51 ` Petteri Räty
2009-10-28 11:11 ` Alexis Ballier
2009-10-30 2:29 ` Doug Goldstein
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4AE6F1CF.1030408@gentoo.org \
--to=betelgeuse@gentoo.org \
--cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox