From: Georg Rudoy <0xd34df00d@gmail.com>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: c++14 global USE flag
Date: Sun, 3 May 2015 17:13:49 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAGbUWSL+zt9a67H3x_QbPstxZbXJ9c7pocXyGmw7Sox1QWxwvg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <pan$ba2a7$f6e5cdc0$71cf289a$fb9f9fe9@cox.net>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2681 bytes --]
2015-05-03 13:51 GMT+03:00 Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net>:
> What about a somewhat more generic flag such as newcode? Like the bindist
> or minimal flags, this could be global, but with local descriptions very
> strongly recommended. Similarly, like minimal, setting it globally would
> be strongly discouraged.
>
> In this case, the newcode local description would be something like:
>
> C++14 related: gcc doesn't support yet, requires clang
>
> ... with an appropriate use-conditional dep.
>
> The newcode flag would however be generic enough that it could be reused
> for C++17, etc, as well, and could obviously be phased out for any
> particular package once its specific newcode dependencies are met in
> stable -- in this case, when a supporting gcc stabilizes.
>
Nice idea, thanks! There are a couple of corner cases though.
> newcode would even be generic enough to be used for say qt6 when the time
> comes, if it turns out to be stuck in the qt overlay for quite some time,
> as was qt5, for the longest time,
What if a package would support (optional) builds with C++17-related
features and (optional) builds with say Qt6, and these could be toggled
independently? Does that imply having something like newcode_cpp17 and
newcode_qt4 on per-package basis?
> and the good bit is, generic meaning,
> that USE=newcode requires a dep that's still generally problematic or
> might be considered excessive to get, for optional functionality that may
> or may not be considered worth it, should be pretty obvious.
>
Does that imply that merely pulling clang for builds is not a
newcode-concern then, and, back to the original topic, in case of
leechcraft C++14 can be enabled unconditionally, again with unconditional
pulling of clang?
That's probably a way to go, but feels like not Gentoo-way enough (just
removing an option).
> Making that meaning even more obvious would be the fact that the flag
> would likely be packageuse-masked for many users for much of the the
> time. That could for instance allow packages using it in-tree, before
> the dep it pulls in is itself in-tree, while still making it possible to
> unmask, for users who either already have the required overlay active, or
> who don't have it active ATM, but are willing to activate it to get the
> features it toggles.
>
Depending on the answer to the previous question, if all the deps are
in-tree, then there is no need in masking the useflag. It could be unmasked
on the per-package basis again, I guess? Then there is a question of the
default (globally unmasked and per-package masks vs globally masked and
per-package unmasks), but that's a relatively minor one.
--
Georg Rudoy
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3642 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-05-03 14:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-24 18:12 [gentoo-dev] RFC: c++14 global USE flag Maxim Koltsov
2015-04-24 18:42 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2015-04-24 18:56 ` Ian Stakenvicius
2015-04-24 19:11 ` Maxim Koltsov
2015-04-24 19:28 ` Georg Rudoy
2015-04-25 14:09 ` Anthony G. Basile
2015-04-25 15:23 ` Peter Stuge
2015-04-25 15:57 ` [gentoo-dev] " Duncan
2015-04-26 16:41 ` Diego Elio Pettenò
2015-04-27 3:21 ` Duncan
2015-04-28 20:07 ` Anthony G. Basile
2015-04-28 21:52 ` Mike Gilbert
2015-04-29 11:27 ` Anthony G. Basile
2015-05-02 21:11 ` Maxim Koltsov
2015-05-02 21:17 ` Kent Fredric
2015-05-02 22:18 ` Georg Rudoy
2015-05-02 22:30 ` Kent Fredric
2015-05-03 10:19 ` Maxim Koltsov
2015-05-03 10:51 ` Duncan
2015-05-03 14:13 ` Georg Rudoy [this message]
2015-05-04 4:36 ` Duncan
2015-05-03 14:08 ` Georg Rudoy
2015-05-03 14:04 ` Georg Rudoy
2015-05-03 19:07 ` Kent Fredric
2015-05-04 3:29 ` Duncan
2015-04-25 15:47 ` [gentoo-dev] " Matthias Maier
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=CAGbUWSL+zt9a67H3x_QbPstxZbXJ9c7pocXyGmw7Sox1QWxwvg@mail.gmail.com \
--to=0xd34df00d@gmail.com \
--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