From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75D11138673 for ; Fri, 25 Jan 2013 06:15:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2AA1BE0652; Fri, 25 Jan 2013 06:15:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 20DB7E064C for ; Fri, 25 Jan 2013 06:15:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2179333DB9A for ; Fri, 25 Jan 2013 06:15:44 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at gentoo.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.328 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.328 tagged_above=-999 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-1.325, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([IPv6:::ffff:127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [IPv6:::ffff:127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TbhOJn7E302q for ; Fri, 25 Jan 2013 06:15:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AF18D33DB95 for ; Fri, 25 Jan 2013 06:15:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1TycZg-0002k4-RP for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Fri, 25 Jan 2013 07:15:40 +0100 Received: from ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.231.22.224]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 25 Jan 2013 07:15:40 +0100 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 25 Jan 2013 07:15:40 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: CONFIG_CHECK_FATAL, making CONFIG_CHECKS fatal by default Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 06:15:10 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <50FE73F1.6090102@gmail.com> <51017B0A.4060608@gentoo.org> <510183B2.8020603@orlitzky.com> <5101EC52.2020003@orlitzky.com> 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 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net User-Agent: Pan/0.140 (Chocolate Salty Balls; GIT 09d34ae /usr/src/portage/src/egit-src/pan2) X-Archives-Salt: 20047b91-aa13-4d2c-b9ba-5a1920da686d X-Archives-Hash: 20deffa01bd58d2ae37084b79492476b Michael Orlitzky posted on Thu, 24 Jan 2013 21:22:10 -0500 as excerpted: > On 01/24/2013 08:39 PM, Duncan wrote: >> >> Meanwhile, my vote is for a NON-FATAL pkg_pretend warning. That gets >> run at the beginning when people are still likely to be watching, so >> should be good enough. Beyond that, gentoo can't keep the obtuse from >> ignoring the warnings, so if it breaks they get to keep the pieces, and >> RESOLVED/ READTHEWARNINGS to any resulting bugs. > > They're not warnings, they're "we just broke your system, hope you > weren't doing anything tonight!" A boulder with WARNING: FALLING ROCKS > spray-painted on the bottom. But a pkg_pretend warning would happen BEFORE the breakage, normally at --pretend/--ask time, when people are still paying attention. So it wouldn't be a boulder with the warning posted on the bottom, it would be a sign (which retaining the analogy, could be painted on the SIDE of a boulder) posted a kilometre ahead. That's the purpose for which pkg_pretend was created, and AFAIK, the purpose for which it is used, tho there's a limitation on the EAPI it can be used with, since it didn't appear in early EAPIs. > Better to spare the innocents, and for the people who set > I_KNOW_WHAT_I_AM_DOING=y in make.conf, we can create > RESOLVED:I_THOUGHT_YOU_KNEW. The thing is, if we use it so much that most folks have that variable set, then we've defeated the purpose and just executed an exercise in futility. That said, as should be plain from previous posts, I'm certainly of the opinion that once we have the warning, it's no longer our responsibility, and people who ignore it get to keep the pieces. In fact, I'm on record as being of the opinon that if such a case were to happen reasonably early in their gentoo experience (as it did back in the day when baselayout shipped /etc/fstab and some people ended up learning the hard way to actually pay attention to etc-updates as a result), ultimately, we'd have fewer bugs of this sort, because people would quickly learn that they had /better/ pay attention... or find another distro if they weren't willing to do so! So yes, RESOLVED/READTHEWARNINGS or the like could be a viable bug status, indeed. =:^) -- 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