* [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCH 0/4] Autounmask changes
@ 2014-08-13 17:59 99% ` Duncan
0 siblings, 0 replies; 1+ results
From: Duncan @ 2014-08-13 17:59 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-portage-dev
Alexander Berntsen posted on Wed, 13 Aug 2014 18:56:28 +0200 as excerpted:
> One thing that needs discussion is what to do with the current behaviour
> of --autounmask, i.e. printing the suggestions. One thing that was
> really weird in my original patches (the ones in this thread)
> is this:
>
> 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.
>
> So either I need to implement tri-state (--autounmask can be yes, no,
> suggest), or I need to do something more drastic.
This remains my problem with the patches as they are now.
* 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.
* Never-the-less, I find the suggestions very helpful and indeed, often
the easiest way to find out what I need to do.
* I routinely use --ask.
Currently, --ask assumes "yes" very easily, simply hit return, and I like
that behavior for simple merges as it's convenient and easily enough
undone. (With --oneshot by default as well, an errant enter is undone
easily enough with a --depclean.)
The patches as they are now would change that, giving me no way to still
get the suggestions with --ask, without chancing the actual write of
those changes. That's particularly bad as the currently convenient
behavior of letting a simple enter indicate yes makes it all too easy to
actually do those writes I don't want done under any circumstances.
While I'm fine with --ask defaulting to (the current) --autounmask-write
behavior by default, I need a way to get the current --ask --autounmask
(without write) behavior too, even if I need to add --autounmask=suggest
or some such to DEFAULTOPTS, because that's /my/ configuration's default
behavior, and I want it to stay that way. =:^)
So please do implement that tri-state --autounmask=suggest behavior. =:^)
The only other /possible/ objection I see is the potential version-
dependent confusion over --autounmask behavior. An argument could be
made that it might be better to simply kill the --autounmask switch, hard-
wiring that behavior, and keep the current --autounmask-write name,
simply making it the default while still allowing people to explicitly set
--autounmask-write=n.
That way, while the remaining --autounmask-write parameter would arguably
unnecessarily keep it's longer name, there could be no confusion over the
changing --autounmask behavior, since that parameter would simply cease
to exist.
But I don't feel strongly about that. If people think the confusion over
--autounmask changing meaning isn't as big a deal as saving those few
extra characters necessary for the longer -write variant, fine with me.
--
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
^ 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 99% ` [gentoo-portage-dev] " Duncan
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox