* Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCH 0/4] Autounmask changes
@ 2014-08-13 19:24 99% ` Wyatt Epp
0 siblings, 0 replies; 1+ results
From: Wyatt Epp @ 2014-08-13 19:24 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-portage-dev
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 1:59 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> wrote:
> Alexander Berntsen posted on Wed, 13 Aug 2014 18:56:28 +0200 as excerpted:
>>
>> emerge foo # this will do what --autounmask does today
>> emerge foo --autounmask # this will do what --autounmask-write does
>> emerge foo -a # this will do what --ask --autounmask-write does
>> emerge foo --autounmask=n # this will do what --autounmask=n does
>>
>> The problem here is that there is no way to do e.g. emerge foo --ask,
>> and get suggestions any longer. You can either have it prompt to write
>> stuff, or you can have it not do anything -- but you can't explicitly
>> have it suggest stuff without prompting to write. This is bad design.
>>
Is there really any situation where the user would benefit from not
having the suggestions? That's sort of rhetorical because it's on by
default, but the point is more that Portage already takes a rather
proactive stance with regard to informing the user about the details
of slot and version conflicts; what's a few more lines? (And if that
IS, indeed, a problem, there's always --quiet.)
Regardless of that, writing keywords as a side-effect of --ask is not
a good path. My personal suggestion would instead be that
--autounmask only do exactly what it says: automatically resolve
minimum keywords needed to merge the depgraph and put them where they
need to be. When used in conjunction with --ask, it would then tell
you "These atoms will be appended to package.keywords" or whatever
file it chooses. Unfortunately historical baggage may prevent that,
but it's a nice thought.
> * I don't want portage writing mask/use changes on its own under any
> circumstances, as I use directories and have my own idea of what files I
> want stuff in.
>
I have this same issue as I give every category its own file. Can we
generalise this in such a way that finer-grained control over write
location could be added? (Off the top of my head, I'm imagining
passing the atom through something like a FILE_REGEX or maybe an
optional script parameter, and the output is the filename within
package.keywords/)
-Wyatt
^ permalink raw reply [relevance 99%]
Results 1-1 of 1 | reverse | options above
-- pct% links below jump to the message on this page, permalinks otherwise --
2014-08-12 9:37 [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 0/4] Autounmask changes Alexander Berntsen
2014-08-13 16:06 ` Alexander Berntsen
2014-08-13 16:45 ` Brian Dolbec
2014-08-13 16:56 ` Alexander Berntsen
2014-08-13 17:59 ` [gentoo-portage-dev] " Duncan
2014-08-13 19:24 99% ` Wyatt Epp
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox