From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BC345139694 for ; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 16:48:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 58F31234086; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 16:48:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EFAFF234038 for ; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 16:48:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.10.30] (ool-4571a227.dyn.optonline.net [69.113.162.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: NP-Hardass) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6B2EC3419BA for ; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 16:48:09 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Sets vs Meta ebuilds To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: From: NP-Hardass Openpgp: id=862040BE422755F27FDE13D5671C52F118F89C67; url=https://sks-keyservers.net/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x671C52F118F89C67 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2017 12:48:04 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 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 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="H6IQ24k4TbSnhEvKsO6w8XCUpBJ8cvMBC" X-Archives-Salt: c8f3d691-939d-4909-9d76-3a3ccb3d2c9c X-Archives-Hash: 5ab711de9bf1ce83a4e2c86ae8293d3b This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --H6IQ24k4TbSnhEvKsO6w8XCUpBJ8cvMBC Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="EP75v4ALPRsraN3Jup7RqgthPmG9NhLBN"; protected-headers="v1" From: NP-Hardass To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Sets vs Meta ebuilds References: In-Reply-To: --EP75v4ALPRsraN3Jup7RqgthPmG9NhLBN Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 07/07/2017 12:32 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: > I have been playing with some package sets and I like the concept of > sets quite a lot. However there is one big drawback. You cannot use a > package set in a profile. Or at least I do not think you can. I have > looked into it a bit and does not seem like it is possible. >=20 > I know I can create a meta ebuild and use it like a package set. I > think it would be useful to have package sets be able to be used in a > profile like meta ebuilds. It would likely reduce the need or use of > meta packages. Not sure if there is any benefit to that approach over a= > set. >=20 > I think sets have benefits over meta packages. This was the most > comprehensive document on sets, benefits, uses, etc. Other than the > general docs on the wiki. > https://makuro.wordpress.com/2010/12/12/intro-to-portage-sets/ >=20 > I would really like to be able to use package sets in profiles. I > think of use and benefit to others as well. >=20 There is actually a huge functional difference between the two that you are missing here. A meta package defines its dependencies in full dependency syntax. This means you can specify versions, USE flag dependencies, make packages dependent on USE flags, etc. A package set is just a list of packages (potentially constrained by version. TTBOMK, there is no inclusion of any USE flag functionality in sets. Additionally, let's say you have a more complicated dependency like || ( A B ), I don't think there is a way to describe that in a package set at all. I'm not sure I see the merit in pushing for package sets in the bulk of cases for this reason. Maybe there is some scenario where package sets are a better option, but you haven't enumerated what that might be (and I'm not really interested in brainstorming until I come up with one, so I'll wait for one frmo someone else) Of course, my sets knowledge is a little limited compared to some people, so if something I've said about package sets is incorrect, please feel free to correct it. --=20 NP-Hardass --EP75v4ALPRsraN3Jup7RqgthPmG9NhLBN-- --H6IQ24k4TbSnhEvKsO6w8XCUpBJ8cvMBC Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEv526yLNI+t7RHfJZHNlBHbKvGPsFAllfu0QACgkQHNlBHbKv GPsOUA//R3aXLqiwHZ/dtYk0fpM2jmiam/vDqFeL0Wegxcz8eK/UTc8O+EocnY/o IUlyhdksrdu4IygPhUgdVE1lxdsAojDAKw1igXBMVjB9hSt+XizPeCMkW8Dg/tEB 5wO1nnRyBYnfrbbW4OBiLFG4KXlw2O/CBrEKj+I75wGVuRk5tri+I8EWkr7WxeA2 4RDri/+Oq/yXI+RZLh0qn0DH75UwiKuJNpC3rKOkdj4/1AAbSAUjMRXLNH3lHGhv zR/6ARyuKJWFdnIyX8gt9H0WS14H092eutcbEGggeWKLYgl8YkW2OALdgjW9n1mo 2z2sxJShwqYfF30gTD85ZtLUIm+nUARccOmcfAb8aoDCz7+P87W3m1vMc7oR31yX JbHEzt8buXaBOujojMSPbsRLqhRcHUBaw3kKejfSC7mFFEpLbrSk39sMAOk6QN64 bjdXISloaMGf5EY2TOy9EiKcS0lk440wj9W/G6Q/QlSECbH/JyyLMk6bZt/P/m4h hwVdnDeQPq+wHM62myLugrD5AKr66xxwnbenSH6F2yzZwDemG6Hz/ndlnoDduJIf mZpqgAEnkE9RyKHH0Rmf/av7ZtHi+RekpJ0U8N/55uA43nyO9ZEQC0qfWFWsVZSW nhFRDQneG3sLXJZgIjQurVzTW75RcLN9Zm/OIER0UoODICdvZeU= =ftwl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --H6IQ24k4TbSnhEvKsO6w8XCUpBJ8cvMBC--