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 1Sbt93-0001Dz-Lj for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 05 Jun 2012 12:45:57 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E7331E0730; Tue, 5 Jun 2012 12:45:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C1E5E05E4 for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2012 12:44:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.249.121] (unknown [63.142.135.69]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: titanofold) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E8AC31B4023 for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2012 12:44:44 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4FCDFF18.3080600@gentoo.org> Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2012 08:44:08 -0400 From: "Aaron W. Swenson" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120501 Thunderbird/12.0.1 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] [gentoo-portage-dev] About forcing rebuilds of other packages issue References: <1338845178.23212.1.camel@belkin4> In-Reply-To: <1338845178.23212.1.camel@belkin4> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5pre Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 8363fb3c-8f44-410f-ba82-c46d9f8db5b6 X-Archives-Hash: 7cdd8b841fa8938ee97a1347f9dd6918 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 06/04/2012 05:26 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote: > Hello, will send this to gentoo-dev mailing list per Zac's > suggestion ;): > > ...They usually do a good job maintaining them, the only issue I > see they hit from time to time is forgetting to run JUST AFTER > updating their systems revdep-rebuild (well, this is so common that > they usually don't forget to), rebuild > dbus-glib/gobject-introspection after major glib update, rebuild > X11 drivers... > > This is because, even if all this information is recorded in > /var/log/portage/elog/summary.log, currently, that log file is > cluttered of a lot of other elog lines that are not related at all > with this important task of rebuilding packages. This is why I > suggested: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=413619 > > That would create a new "erebuild" (or whatever the name you > prefer) to ONLY contain exact command to run by admin to have a > safe system after update. It would have as main advantage: - Looks > easier to implement. - It relies in current and existing tools > (python-updater, perl-cleaner, "q", equery...), then, they could be > used just now via a script running all of them. - It also looks > much more "professional" to try to unify a bit what commands to run > ;) (currently, some ebuilds tells you to manually re-emerge > packages and some people wrongly run "emerge dbus-glib" when they > should run "emerge -1 dbus-glib". Telling us to people what exact > command they need to copy&paste&run will help to get their systems > cleaner also. > > ... > > The problem of that one is that, even if it would be "the perfect > solution": - Looks to be stalled for a long time. - Looks to need a > lot of functions (like revdep-rebuild, python-updater...) to be > merged in portage itself. It will then probably take a lot of time > to get them integrated (specially seeing we are still not able to > use preserve-libs because it looks to cause some other problems) - > In that bug report I have also seen discussion about whether > handle this only via SLOTs (that personally think it will be even > harder to achieve for all packages in the tree showing this kind of > problems when updating, for example, I doubt how "glib" - > "dbus-glib/g-i" case could be handled in this way. - Looks like > there is no consensus about what to do and, then, this could > probably be implemented on eapi... 7? While former could probably > be implemented much sooner (probably even in eapi5) > > This is why I think we should try to push a bit my first suggestion > for the short term until "the perfect one" is ready as, until then, > we are having for years a problem that, personally, I think it > should be handled a bit better. > > Thanks a lot for your attention > "There's never anything important in all that text." - Anonymous Gentoo User We've already determined that the users don't read the output. This is a known fact. Something I repeat in #gentoo more often than I care to admit is "Seriously, read the output." I agree with the users that there's too much output, and some of the output is indeed useless. The output they aren't reading isn't just rebuild commands, but also the next step they're supposed to take after the emerge has finished, groups their users need to be in to use a particular feature, et cetera. The ideal solution is for the Ebuild to instruct the PMS to rebuild the dependent packages. We can have a variable called REBUILD. All packages that would need to be rebuilt can be listed in it. Only those packages that are installed would be built. The actual list of the packages to be rebuilt would be determined at dependency checking time. That way, the user can approve the rebuild of the packages. Just placing the commands in a separate log won't really solve a whole lot. Further, it will bump any elog messages even further down in the importance ranking. - -- Mr. Aaron W. Swenson Gentoo Linux Developer Email : titanofold@gentoo.org GnuPG FP : 2C00 7719 4F85 FB07 A49C 0E31 5713 AA03 D1BB FDA0 GnuPG ID : D1BBFDA0 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iF4EAREIAAYFAk/N/xgACgkQVxOqA9G7/aBGGwD/TNRbZNie6J1RkI0DETgcUlwG VXBY2UamMijjKLFPluEA/jwo9B7qejNkiko/xDvecUq8CaF02Qc4tKMf/MbWs7LW =ysgF -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----