On 30-09-2021 08:44:33 +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Thu, 2021-09-30 at 08:40 +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Would it be possible to have some switch (e.g. --style=legacy) that
> > controls this new vs. the old behaviour?  Would perhaps allow
> > applications that parse the output to work via setting this in the
> > global opts.
> 
> Patches welcome.  It shouldn't be hard, my commit shows which files need
> to be edited to alter the prefixes and how to pass them into ebd.

I see.

> > In addition, much like the colour map, how do you see this change in
> > light of eclasses, init-scripts, etc. that also use the same scheme as
> > Portage at the moment?  Would you expect to change those too at some
> > point?
> 
> Eclasses are supposed to use standard einfo, elog... functions, so they
> should just work™.  If someone's reinventing the wheel, it's not my
> problem.
> 
> Init scripts aren't supposed to be used inside the PM, so that's out of
> scope.

I was just referring to the overall "feel" of Gentoo, which your work
changes.  It is ok that you don't plan on doing anything there.

> > Final question, am I understanding correctly that normal lines are not
> > prefixed with something?  Would it be, for consistency, alignment, and
> > certainty of selecting rows something to use a prefix for those lines
> > too (assuming they aren't at this point)?
> 
> I don't know, we've never done that.  I suppose it would be possible but
> it is even more controversial and unlike the proposed changes, it would
> actually require mangling the process output.

If I remember correctly, Portage already does.  In which case, doing
this (even if it were adding leading spaces) would not be that much
work?

Thanks,
Fabian

-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level