[gentoo-pms] Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP: gentoo sync based unified deps proposas

[Brian Harring <ferringb@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 11:47:42AM +0200, Micha?? G??rny wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 02:24:26 -0700
> Brian Harring <ferringb@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 10:25:51AM +0200, Micha?? G??rny wrote:
> > > > test depends: to specifically mark those dependencies that are
> > > > only needed for when the pkg is being tested; effectively
> > > > ephemeral build/run time depends that go away once testing is
> > > > completed.
> > > 
> > > Does that mean that USE=test is going away somehow?
> > 
> > If you think it through, a test use flag still is needed in the cases 
> > where the rdep itself would change if test was enabled; such a source 
> > is fairy rare, but not always just someone being moronic- certain 
> > cases to do testing, the tests need to reach in fairly deeply and 
> > recompilation for compile vs test isn't exposed.
> 
> Yes, and sometimes we're doing 'use test'. I simply don't see how
> adding a separate group of dependencies just for 'test' phase is going
> to help us.
> They fit just fine into build-time dependencies right now.

I'm going to assume you  typo'd "build-time" into "run-time"; on the 
offchance you've never written actual test code, to test the code you 
have to *run* the results.

Simple example, portage doesn't need eselect nor logrotate, nor afaik 
selinux or paxutils, till runtime since it doesn't test those 
pathways.

A non-crap resolver can exploit that gap when it comes to 
parallelization.

Just heading off an email from you, no, you cannot just stick it into 
RDEPEND then.

If you did so, the test deps would be locked into the required runtime 
graph for as long as the pkg was installed.

If in doubt of how that matters; trace the usage of gtest, nose, etc.  
Nose is a good example additionally since a properly setup setup.py, 
the pkg doesn't need nose for build- just strictly for test.



> > > A quick
> > > glance shows that what you have expanded there, a fairly reasonable
> > > Gentoo dev will solve using:
> > >
> > > RDEPEND="[common depends]"
> > > DEPEND="${RDEPEND}
> > >     [build only depends]"
> > 
> > from diffball (under current EAPIs)
> > 
> > """
> > RDEPEND=">=sys-libs/zlib-1.1.4
> >         >=app-arch/bzip2-1.0.2
> >         app-arch/xz-utils"
> > DEPEND="${RDEPEND}
> >         virtual/pkgconfig"
> > """
> > 
> > becomes the following under the proposal:
> > 
> > """
> > DEPENDENCIES=">=sys-libs/zlib-1.1.4
> >         >=app-arch/bzip2-1.0.2
> >         app-arch/xz-utils"
> >         dep:build? ( virtual/pkgconfig )"
> > """
> 
> Err, shouldn't the first three deps be namespaced?

No.

Please read the glep, specifically the section "basic rules".


Also, you come up with a valid criticism, valid point, etc, something 
*worthwhile*, I'll respond.  If it doesn't meet that criteria, assume 
I won't respond (feel free to bitch to the council during whatever 
vote occurs for this GLEP that I ignored your noise; it's a risk I'll 
willingly take).

~harring