From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1N2lrY-0003Fz-Rh for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 27 Oct 2009 13:13:25 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5C5FFE0807; Tue, 27 Oct 2009 13:12:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from petteriraty.eu (host.petteriraty.eu [188.40.80.83]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A26EE0807 for ; Tue, 27 Oct 2009 13:12:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [82.130.46.226] (qob2.kyla.fi [82.130.46.226]) by petteriraty.eu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7A7F4295A4 for ; Tue, 27 Oct 2009 13:12:55 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4AE6F1CF.1030408@gentoo.org> Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 15:12:47 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?UGV0dGVyaSBSw6R0eQ==?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; fi; rv:1.8.1.23) Gecko/20090916 Thunderbird/2.0.0.23 Mnenhy/0.7.6.666 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] Unused ebuild built_with_use cleanup References: <4AC20C83.3050904@gentoo.org> <4AE2F3CB.6050003@gentoo.org> <4AE41EF7.5020508@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0 OpenPGP: url=http://users.tkk.fi/~praty/public.asc Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigC11918F823DEBF07C10DA877" X-Archives-Salt: fc9c4c44-2d1a-40ea-be6d-fecdcf1d7ae5 X-Archives-Hash: 5d15ce9e61ac3da843eb414aeeea8d85 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigC11918F823DEBF07C10DA877 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable James Cloos wrote: >>>>>> "Petteri" =3D=3D Petteri R=C3=A4ty writes:= >=20 > 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? >=20 > What possible benefit could be had from dropping ebuilds for no other > reason than their EAPI? >=20 The goal is to eventually get rid of built_with_use. >=20 > 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 --------------enigC11918F823DEBF07C10DA877 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.13 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkrm8c8ACgkQcxLzpIGCsLQJ8wCfcequcfPRJlerZ2VsC3I6I8fh qdMAn1PgLNI0aYE5o6yq5MMzsedDNJDL =sfhK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigC11918F823DEBF07C10DA877--