[gentoo-dev] [news item review] bash-completion-2.1-r90, version 2

[gentoo-dev] [news item review] bash-completion-2.1-r90, version 2

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 299 bytes --]

Hello, developers.

I'm planning to commit this news item before >=2.1-r90 goes stable.
I have rewritten the message to be more user-oriented like Rich
suggested (big thanks to you!) and added a paragraph about loading
bashcomp in bashrc.

Please review.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

[-- Attachment #1.2: 2014-xx-yy-bash_completion_2.1_r90.en.txt --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 1992 bytes --]

Title: bash-completion-2.1-r90
Author: Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org>
Content-Type: text/plain
Posted: 2014-MM-DD
Revision: 1
News-Item-Format: 1.0
Display-If-Installed: <app-shells/bash-completion-2.1-r90

Starting with app-shells/bash-completion-2.1-r90, the framework used to
enable and manage completions in Gentoo is finally changing in order to
properly follow upstream design. This has some important implications
for our users.

Firstly, the install location for completions changes to follow upstream
default.  The completions enabled before the upgrade will continue to
work but you may no longer be able to enable or disable completions
installed prior to the upgrade. To solve this issue, the packages
installing completions need to rebuilt. The following command can be
used to automatically rebuild all the relevant packages:

$ find /usr/share/bash-completion -maxdepth 1 -type f \
	'!' -name 'bash_completion' -exec emerge -1v {} +

Secondly, the autoloading support introduced upstream removes the
penalties involved with enabling a great number of completions. This
allowed us to switch to an opt-out model where all completions installed
after the upgrade are enabled by default. Specific completions can be
disabled using 'eselect bashcomp disable ...'

The model change implies that all current selections done using 'eselect
bashcomp' can not be properly migrated and will be disregarded when
the relevant completion files are built against the new bash-completion
version. After rebuilding all the packages providing completion files,
you may want to remove the stale symlinks using the following command:

$ find /etc/bash_completion.d -type l -delete

Lastly, we have solved the issue causing bash-completion support to be
enabled by default on login shells only. If you needed to explicitly
source 'bash_completion' script in bashrc, you can safely remove that
code now since system-wide bashrc takes care of loading it.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 949 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] [news item review] bash-completion-2.1-r90, version 2

[Marc Schiffbauer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 643 bytes --]

* Michał Górny schrieb am 10.11.14 um 22:18 Uhr:
>Hello, developers.
>
>I'm planning to commit this news item before >=2.1-r90 goes stable.
>I have rewritten the message to be more user-oriented like Rich
>suggested (big thanks to you!) and added a paragraph about loading
>bashcomp in bashrc.
>
>Please review.

Looks good to me, but to remove "stale symlinks" you need to add the 
-L option to find. Or write just "symlinks", because like this it 
will remove *all* symlinks.

>
>$ find /etc/bash_completion.d -type l -delete
>

-Marc

-- 
0x35A64134 - 8AAC 5F46 83B4 DB70 8317
             3723 296C 6CCA 35A6 4134

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 173 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] [news item review] bash-completion-2.1-r90, version 2

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 733 bytes --]

Dnia 2014-11-11, o godz. 09:53:58
Marc Schiffbauer <mschiff@gentoo.org> napisał(a):

> * Michał Górny schrieb am 10.11.14 um 22:18 Uhr:
> >Hello, developers.
> >
> >I'm planning to commit this news item before >=2.1-r90 goes stable.
> >I have rewritten the message to be more user-oriented like Rich
> >suggested (big thanks to you!) and added a paragraph about loading
> >bashcomp in bashrc.
> >
> >Please review.
> 
> Looks good to me, but to remove "stale symlinks" you need to add the 
> -L option to find. Or write just "symlinks", because like this it 
> will remove *all* symlinks.

Well, the meaning was 'all symlinks since they are stale now'. I will
try to reword it.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 949 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] [news item review] bash-completion-2.1-r90, version 2

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 680 bytes --]

Dnia 2014-11-11, o godz. 09:53:58
Marc Schiffbauer <mschiff@gentoo.org> napisał(a):

> * Michał Górny schrieb am 10.11.14 um 22:18 Uhr:
> >Hello, developers.
> >
> >I'm planning to commit this news item before >=2.1-r90 goes stable.
> >I have rewritten the message to be more user-oriented like Rich
> >suggested (big thanks to you!) and added a paragraph about loading
> >bashcomp in bashrc.
> >
> >Please review.
> 
> Looks good to me, but to remove "stale symlinks" you need to add the 
> -L option to find. Or write just "symlinks", because like this it 
> will remove *all* symlinks.

Is the attached version more clear?

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

[-- Attachment #1.2: 2014-xx-yy-bash_completion_2.1_r90.en.txt --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 2038 bytes --]

Title: bash-completion-2.1-r90
Author: Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org>
Content-Type: text/plain
Posted: 2014-MM-DD
Revision: 1
News-Item-Format: 1.0
Display-If-Installed: <app-shells/bash-completion-2.1-r90

Starting with app-shells/bash-completion-2.1-r90, the framework used to
enable and manage completions in Gentoo is finally changing in order to
properly follow upstream design. This has some important implications
for our users.

Firstly, the install location for completions changes to follow upstream
default.  The completions enabled before the upgrade will continue to
work but you may no longer be able to enable or disable completions
installed prior to the upgrade. To solve this issue, the packages
installing completions need to rebuilt. The following command can be
used to automatically rebuild all the relevant packages:

$ find /usr/share/bash-completion -maxdepth 1 -type f \
	'!' -name 'bash_completion' -exec emerge -1v {} +

Secondly, the autoloading support introduced upstream removes the
penalties involved with enabling a great number of completions. This
allowed us to switch to an opt-out model where all completions installed
after the upgrade are enabled by default. Specific completions can be
disabled using 'eselect bashcomp disable ...'

The model change implies that all current selections done using 'eselect
bashcomp' can not be properly migrated and will be disregarded when
the relevant completion files are built against the new bash-completion
version. After rebuilding all the packages providing completion files,
you may want to remove the symlinks that were used to configure
the previous framework using the following command:

$ find /etc/bash_completion.d -type l -delete

Lastly, we have solved the issue causing bash-completion support to be
enabled by default on login shells only. If you needed to explicitly
source 'bash_completion' script in bashrc, you can safely remove that
code now since system-wide bashrc takes care of loading it.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 949 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: [news item review] bash-completion-2.1-r90, version 2

[Duncan]

Michał Górny posted on Tue, 11 Nov 2014 11:03:03 +0100 as excerpted:

> Dnia 2014-11-11, o godz. 09:53:58 Marc Schiffbauer <mschiff@gentoo.org>
> napisał(a):
> 
>> * Michał Górny schrieb am 10.11.14 um 22:18 Uhr:
>> >Hello, developers.
>> >
>> >I'm planning to commit this news item before >=2.1-r90 goes stable.
>> >I have rewritten the message to be more user-oriented like Rich
>> >suggested (big thanks to you!) and added a paragraph about loading
>> >bashcomp in bashrc.
>> >
>> >Please review.
>> 
>> Looks good to me, but to remove "stale symlinks" you need to add the -L
>> option to find. Or write just "symlinks", because like this it will
>> remove *all* symlinks.
> 
> Well, the meaning was 'all symlinks since they are stale now'. I will
> try to reword it.

Note that some users (including me) have symlinks in 
/etc/bash_completion.d/ that point to their own completions in
/usr/local/share/bash_completion/ or the like.

Now I don't claim to know much about creating completions, but
for instance, many of my completions were for emerge stubs
(ea for emerge --ask, etc), so I was able to simply source the gentoo 
completion in my own, then use emerge's completion function for my stubs.

With this update I had to figure out enough about completions to figure 
out how to update mine, and I've already done so.

But, the symlinks pointing to my completions in /usr/local are most 
assuredly *NOT* stale, neither will remerging anything make them so.

So I don't want to remove those symlinks, or I'd lose the connection to 
my own completions (presuming the normal bash completion doesn't look in 
/usr/local/share/bash_completion for them... I never claimed I to be a 
bash-completion wizard, only to have hacked up something that seems to 
work, and I want it to STAY working).

So if indeed all installed symlinks should be stale at that point, then 
the suggested -L -type l -delete would be a good change, as it wouldn't 
remove any non-stale symlinks users had put there themselves.

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [news item review] bash-completion-2.1-r90, version 2

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2345 bytes --]

Dnia 2014-11-11, o godz. 11:21:00
Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> napisał(a):

> Michał Górny posted on Tue, 11 Nov 2014 11:03:03 +0100 as excerpted:
> 
> > Dnia 2014-11-11, o godz. 09:53:58 Marc Schiffbauer <mschiff@gentoo.org>
> > napisał(a):
> > 
> >> * Michał Górny schrieb am 10.11.14 um 22:18 Uhr:
> >> >Hello, developers.
> >> >
> >> >I'm planning to commit this news item before >=2.1-r90 goes stable.
> >> >I have rewritten the message to be more user-oriented like Rich
> >> >suggested (big thanks to you!) and added a paragraph about loading
> >> >bashcomp in bashrc.
> >> >
> >> >Please review.
> >> 
> >> Looks good to me, but to remove "stale symlinks" you need to add the -L
> >> option to find. Or write just "symlinks", because like this it will
> >> remove *all* symlinks.
> > 
> > Well, the meaning was 'all symlinks since they are stale now'. I will
> > try to reword it.
> 
> Note that some users (including me) have symlinks in 
> /etc/bash_completion.d/ that point to their own completions in
> /usr/local/share/bash_completion/ or the like.

If you do custom stuff like this, you already know enough to understand
the consequences of removing the symlinks. You were on your own
already, so don't expect that we're going to start holding your hand
now.

> But, the symlinks pointing to my completions in /usr/local are most 
> assuredly *NOT* stale, neither will remerging anything make them so.
> 
> So I don't want to remove those symlinks, or I'd lose the connection to 
> my own completions (presuming the normal bash completion doesn't look in 
> /usr/local/share/bash_completion for them... I never claimed I to be a 
> bash-completion wizard, only to have hacked up something that seems to 
> work, and I want it to STAY working).

Of course, you could have asked for proper /usr/local support... but
why? It's easier to hack things around then complain.

> So if indeed all installed symlinks should be stale at that point, then 
> the suggested -L -type l -delete would be a good change, as it wouldn't 
> remove any non-stale symlinks users had put there themselves.

People who installed bash-completion after 27.08 have all completions
in completionsdir already. For them, the symlinks will still be valid
yet unnecessary.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 949 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] [news item review] bash-completion-2.1-r90, version 2

[Marc Schiffbauer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 821 bytes --]

* Michał Górny schrieb am 11.11.14 um 12:06 Uhr:
>Dnia 2014-11-11, o godz. 09:53:58
>Marc Schiffbauer <mschiff@gentoo.org> napisał(a):
>
>> * Michał Górny schrieb am 10.11.14 um 22:18 Uhr:
>> >Hello, developers.
>> >
>> >I'm planning to commit this news item before >=2.1-r90 goes stable.
>> >I have rewritten the message to be more user-oriented like Rich
>> >suggested (big thanks to you!) and added a paragraph about loading
>> >bashcomp in bashrc.
>> >
>> >Please review.
>>
>> Looks good to me, but to remove "stale symlinks" you need to add the
>> -L option to find. Or write just "symlinks", because like this it
>> will remove *all* symlinks.
>
>Is the attached version more clear?

Yes, I think so.


-- 
0x35A64134 - 8AAC 5F46 83B4 DB70 8317
             3723 296C 6CCA 35A6 4134

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 173 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] [news item review] bash-completion-2.1-r90, version 2

[Diamond]

On Mon, 10 Nov 2014 22:18:01 +0100
Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Hello, developers.
> 
> I'm planning to commit this news item before >=2.1-r90 goes stable.

It's pretty strange, but after the last "emerge -1uDN world" system
update I lost bash-complition. It was removed
(app-admin/eselect-bashcomp-1.3.6, app-shells/bash-completion-1.3-r2,
app-shells/gentoo-bashcomp-20121024) during "emerge --depclean"
process. I have "bash-completion" USE-flag in /etc/portage/make.conf
and installed bashcomp long time ago. Now it was semi-automatically
deleted. May it be relatated to this changes (migration to 2.1-r90)?

Re: [gentoo-dev] [news item review] bash-completion-2.1-r90, version 2

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1047 bytes --]

Dnia 2014-11-20, o godz. 11:58:59
Diamond <diamond@hi-net.ru> napisał(a):

> On Mon, 10 Nov 2014 22:18:01 +0100
> Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
> > Hello, developers.
> > 
> > I'm planning to commit this news item before >=2.1-r90 goes stable.
> 
> It's pretty strange, but after the last "emerge -1uDN world" system
> update I lost bash-complition. It was removed
> (app-admin/eselect-bashcomp-1.3.6, app-shells/bash-completion-1.3-r2,
> app-shells/gentoo-bashcomp-20121024) during "emerge --depclean"
> process. I have "bash-completion" USE-flag in /etc/portage/make.conf
> and installed bashcomp long time ago. Now it was semi-automatically
> deleted. May it be relatated to this changes (migration to 2.1-r90)?

Partially. USE=bash-completion will be completely removed,
and completions will be installed unconditionally. You have to install
app-shells/bash-completion yourself if you want to use it.

Maybe I should mention the USE flag changes too in the news item :).

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 949 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] [news item review] bash-completion-2.1-r90, version 2

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 462 bytes --]

Dnia 2014-11-10, o godz. 22:18:01
Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> napisał(a):

> Hello, developers.
> 
> I'm planning to commit this news item before >=2.1-r90 goes stable.
> I have rewritten the message to be more user-oriented like Rich
> suggested (big thanks to you!) and added a paragraph about loading
> bashcomp in bashrc.
> 
> Please review.

Next version, added the paragraph about USE=bash-completion.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

[-- Attachment #1.2: 2014-xx-yy-bash_completion_2.1_r90.en.txt --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 2430 bytes --]

Title: bash-completion-2.1-r90
Author: Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org>
Content-Type: text/plain
Posted: 2014-MM-DD
Revision: 1
News-Item-Format: 1.0
Display-If-Installed: <app-shells/bash-completion-2.1-r90

Starting with app-shells/bash-completion-2.1-r90, the framework used to
enable and manage completions in Gentoo is finally changing in order to
properly follow upstream design. This has some important implications
for our users.

Firstly, the install location for completions changes to follow upstream
default.  The completions enabled before the upgrade will continue to
work but you may no longer be able to enable or disable completions
installed prior to the upgrade. To solve this issue, the packages
installing completions need to rebuilt. The following command can be
used to automatically rebuild all the relevant packages:

$ find /usr/share/bash-completion -maxdepth 1 -type f \
	'!' -name 'bash_completion' -exec emerge -1v {} +

Secondly, the autoloading support introduced upstream removes the
penalties involved with enabling a great number of completions. This
allowed us to switch to an opt-out model where all completions installed
after the upgrade are enabled by default. Specific completions can be
disabled using 'eselect bashcomp disable ...'

The model change implies that all current selections done using 'eselect
bashcomp' can not be properly migrated and will be disregarded when
the relevant completion files are built against the new bash-completion
version. After rebuilding all the packages providing completion files,
you may want to remove the symlinks that were used to configure
the previous framework using the following command:

$ find /etc/bash_completion.d -type l -delete

Thirdly, we have solved the issue causing bash-completion support to be
enabled by default on login shells only. If you needed to explicitly
source 'bash_completion' script in bashrc, you can safely remove that
code now since system-wide bashrc takes care of loading it.

Lastly, we would like to explain that USE=bash-completion is being
removed from packages for the completions will be installed
unconditionally now. However, this will result in some implicit
dependencies being removed. Most specifically, users wishing to use
bash-completion will have to request app-shells/bash-completion
explicitly, e.g.:

$ emerge -n app-shells/bash-completion

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 949 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: [news item review] bash-completion-2.1-r90, version 2

[Duncan]

Michał Górny posted on Thu, 20 Nov 2014 12:22:53 +0100 as excerpted:

> Thirdly, we have solved the issue causing bash-completion support to be
> enabled by default on login shells only. If you needed to explicitly
> source 'bash_completion' script in bashrc, you can safely remove that
> code now since system-wide bashrc takes care of loading it.

FWIW, I lost bash-completion yesterday when I updated and both bash and 
bash-completion were updated.  Fortunately I remembered that bash-
completion's undergoing changes and the various discussion here (the 
heads-up on such changes that I get here being a big reason I'm 
subscribed), and was able to compare the binpkgs for the old and new 
versions to figure out what happened.

It could be useful to say that if a user's custom config breaks, they 
need to change it to source the file in the new location, /etc/bash/
bashrc.d/bash_completion.sh, and that while they are at it they might 
want to simply source all (non-dot-file non-backup) files in that dir, as 
it's a new directory location designed to have files dropped into it to 
be sourced by bashrc, with such an approach being exactly what the 
default solution does.

Or don't worry about it since users who have such custom configs should 
be able to handle it themselves, but risk a wave of bugs when they can't/
don't, at least before filing the bug.  Without the heads-up from here 
I'd have certainly eventually figured it out, but it's an open question 
whether I'd have figured out the problem before I filed a bug, myself.

(FWIW this is why a lot of news items end up pointing to a writeup on the 
wiki or dev-space with more details, because at some point people realize 
there's more detail there than appropriate for an ideally concise news 
item, but providing that link with further detail ends up being easier 
than dealing with the bug fallout if it's not provided.  As the dev doing 
it, your choice of course, either way.)

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman