[gentoo-dev] [PATCH 1/2] optfeature.eclass: New eclass with definition from eutils

[gentoo-dev] [PATCH 1/2] optfeature.eclass: New eclass with definition from eutils

[David Seifert]

Signed-off-by: David Seifert <soap@gentoo.org>
---
 eclass/optfeature.eclass | 63 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 63 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 eclass/optfeature.eclass

diff --git a/eclass/optfeature.eclass b/eclass/optfeature.eclass
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..b0082606cd6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/eclass/optfeature.eclass
@@ -0,0 +1,63 @@
+# Copyright 1999-2020 Gentoo Authors
+# Distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License v2
+
+# @ECLASS: optfeature.eclass
+# @MAINTAINER:
+# base-system@gentoo.org
+# @BLURB: Advertise optional functionality that might be useful to users
+
+case "${EAPI:-0}" in
+	[0-7]) ;;
+	*)     die "Unsupported EAPI=${EAPI} (unknown) for ${ECLASS}" ;;
+esac
+
+if [[ -z ${_OPTFEATURE_ECLASS} ]]; then
+_OPTFEATURE_ECLASS=1
+
+# @FUNCTION: optfeature
+# @USAGE: <short description> <package atom to match> [other atoms]
+# @DESCRIPTION:
+# Print out a message suggesting an optional package (or packages)
+# not currently installed which provides the described functionality.
+#
+# The following snippet would suggest app-misc/foo for optional foo support,
+# app-misc/bar or app-misc/baz[bar] for optional bar support
+# and either both app-misc/a and app-misc/b or app-misc/c for alphabet support.
+# @CODE
+#	optfeature "foo support" app-misc/foo
+#	optfeature "bar support" app-misc/bar app-misc/baz[bar]
+#	optfeature "alphabet support" "app-misc/a app-misc/b" app-misc/c
+# @CODE
+optfeature() {
+	debug-print-function ${FUNCNAME} "$@"
+
+	local i j msg
+	local desc=$1
+	local flag=0
+	shift
+	for i; do
+		for j in ${i}; do
+			if has_version "${j}"; then
+				flag=1
+			else
+				flag=0
+				break
+			fi
+		done
+		if [[ ${flag} -eq 1 ]]; then
+			break
+		fi
+	done
+	if [[ ${flag} -eq 0 ]]; then
+		for i; do
+			msg=" "
+			for j in ${i}; do
+				msg+=" ${j} and"
+			done
+			msg="${msg:0: -4} for ${desc}"
+			elog "${msg}"
+		done
+	fi
+}
+
+fi
-- 
2.28.0

[gentoo-dev] [PATCH 2/2] eutils.eclass: Use optfeature() from optfeature.eclass

[David Seifert]

Signed-off-by: David Seifert <soap@gentoo.org>
---
 eclass/eutils.eclass | 49 ++------------------------------------------
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-)

diff --git a/eclass/eutils.eclass b/eclass/eutils.eclass
index 20dec774f2f..4255056f310 100644
--- a/eclass/eutils.eclass
+++ b/eclass/eutils.eclass
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# Copyright 1999-2019 Gentoo Authors
+# Copyright 1999-2020 Gentoo Authors
 # Distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License v2
 
 # @ECLASS: eutils.eclass
@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ _EUTILS_ECLASS=1
 # implicitly inherited (now split) eclasses
 case ${EAPI:-0} in
 0|1|2|3|4|5|6)
-	inherit desktop epatch estack ltprune multilib preserve-libs \
+	inherit desktop epatch estack ltprune multilib optfeature preserve-libs \
 		toolchain-funcs vcs-clean
 	;;
 esac
@@ -186,51 +186,6 @@ use_if_iuse() {
 	use $1
 }
 
-# @FUNCTION: optfeature
-# @USAGE: <short description> <package atom to match> [other atoms]
-# @DESCRIPTION:
-# Print out a message suggesting an optional package (or packages)
-# not currently installed which provides the described functionality.
-#
-# The following snippet would suggest app-misc/foo for optional foo support,
-# app-misc/bar or app-misc/baz[bar] for optional bar support
-# and either both app-misc/a and app-misc/b or app-misc/c for alphabet support.
-# @CODE
-#	optfeature "foo support" app-misc/foo
-#	optfeature "bar support" app-misc/bar app-misc/baz[bar]
-#	optfeature "alphabet support" "app-misc/a app-misc/b" app-misc/c
-# @CODE
-optfeature() {
-	debug-print-function ${FUNCNAME} "$@"
-	local i j msg
-	local desc=$1
-	local flag=0
-	shift
-	for i; do
-		for j in ${i}; do
-			if has_version "${j}"; then
-				flag=1
-			else
-				flag=0
-				break
-			fi
-		done
-		if [[ ${flag} -eq 1 ]]; then
-			break
-		fi
-	done
-	if [[ ${flag} -eq 0 ]]; then
-		for i; do
-			msg=" "
-			for j in ${i}; do
-				msg+=" ${j} and"
-			done
-			msg="${msg:0: -4} for ${desc}"
-			elog "${msg}"
-		done
-	fi
-}
-
 case ${EAPI:-0} in
 0|1|2|3|4)
 
-- 
2.28.0

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH 2/2] eutils.eclass: Use optfeature() from optfeature.eclass

[Ulrich Mueller]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 606 bytes --]

>>>>> On Sun, 06 Sep 2020, David Seifert wrote:

> @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ _EUTILS_ECLASS=1
>  # implicitly inherited (now split) eclasses
>  case ${EAPI:-0} in
>  0|1|2|3|4|5|6)
> -	inherit desktop epatch estack ltprune multilib preserve-libs \
> +	inherit desktop epatch estack ltprune multilib optfeature preserve-libs \
>  		toolchain-funcs vcs-clean
>  	;;
>  esac

I count 163 ebuilds calling optfeature in EAPI 7, but only 24 in older
EAPIs, which makes me wonder if the conditional inherit makes any sense.

Maybe just commit the new eclass, update ebuilds, then remove the
function from eutils?

Ulrich

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 507 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH 2/2] eutils.eclass: Use optfeature() from optfeature.eclass

[David Seifert]

On Sun, 2020-09-06 at 21:49 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > > > > > On Sun, 06 Sep 2020, David Seifert wrote:
> > @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ _EUTILS_ECLASS=1
> >  # implicitly inherited (now split) eclasses
> >  case ${EAPI:-0} in
> >  0|1|2|3|4|5|6)
> > -	inherit desktop epatch estack ltprune multilib preserve-libs \
> > +	inherit desktop epatch estack ltprune multilib optfeature
> > preserve-libs \
> >  		toolchain-funcs vcs-clean
> >  	;;
> >  esac
> 
> I count 163 ebuilds calling optfeature in EAPI 7, but only 24 in older
> EAPIs, which makes me wonder if the conditional inherit makes any
> sense.
> 
> Maybe just commit the new eclass, update ebuilds, then remove the
> function from eutils?
> 
> Ulrich

I'll get a lot of heat for breaking EAPI 2 ebuilds in some random
abandoned overlay because we guarantee eclass API backwards
compatibility for 20 years!

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH 2/2] eutils.eclass: Use optfeature() from optfeature.eclass

[Ulrich Mueller]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 541 bytes --]

>>>>> On Sun, 06 Sep 2020, David Seifert wrote:

> On Sun, 2020-09-06 at 21:49 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> Maybe just commit the new eclass, update ebuilds, then remove the
>> function from eutils?

> I'll get a lot of heat for breaking EAPI 2 ebuilds in some random
> abandoned overlay because we guarantee eclass API backwards
> compatibility for 20 years!

optfeature affects only elog output, so there won't be any real
breakage.

And of course, there should be some grace period (I'd suggest 30 days)
between steps 2 and 3.

Ulrich

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 507 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH 1/2] optfeature.eclass: New eclass with definition from eutils

[Joonas Niilola]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 313 bytes --]


On 9/6/20 6:47 PM, David Seifert wrote:
> ---
>  eclass/optfeature.eclass | 63 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 63 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 eclass/optfeature.eclass
>
Can we have the "why" answered? Wasn't this supposed to be part of
future EAPI?

-- juippis



[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 642 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH 1/2] optfeature.eclass: New eclass with definition from eutils

[David Seifert]

On Sun, 2020-09-06 at 18:51 +0300, Joonas Niilola wrote:
> On 9/6/20 6:47 PM, David Seifert wrote:
> > ---
> >  eclass/optfeature.eclass | 63
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 63 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644 eclass/optfeature.eclass
> > 
> Can we have the "why" answered? Wasn't this supposed to be part of
> future EAPI?
> 
> -- juippis
> 
> 

It's one of those features that comes up once a year, everyone agrees
that it would be great to have, noone wants to provide a proof-of-
concept because portage, and then it gets deferred for another round of
EAPI. Unless I can be convinced that it will be in EAPI 8, this function
will likely stick around.