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 47682138247 for ; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 05:38:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DB8FFE0A89; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 05:38:01 +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 1C493E0A7D for ; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 05:38:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED3B033EFFA for ; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 05:37:59 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at gentoo.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.49 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.49 tagged_above=-999 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.957, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.531, 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 4yqHsXdbAONI for ; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 05:37:54 +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 F3E1A33F195 for ; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 05:37:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VjjR6-0003Co-2Q for gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 06:37:48 +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, 22 Nov 2013 06:37:48 +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, 22 Nov 2013 06:37:48 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCHES] Remove --autounmask, rename --autounmask-write to --autounmask Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2013 05:37:25 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <528DD07E.3010603@plaimi.net> <528DF698.6090203@plaimi.net> <528E1776.1030908@plaimi.net> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-portage-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 6e6fd84 /usr/src/portage/src/egit-src/pan2) X-Archives-Salt: 42c5b93c-b95a-4467-8748-9f54df38c525 X-Archives-Hash: f25f9c1699a47e8851db07ee605a47b0 Alexander Berntsen posted on Thu, 21 Nov 2013 15:23:50 +0100 as excerpted: >> 4) You're saying emerge --ask foo would write the config > No. Please read comment 10[0]. Quoting one example from comment 10: emerge --ask foo would also do what is currently done by: emerge --ask --autounmask-write foo Which is exactly what I said, and what you're now saying it won't do, while pointing at comment 10 which says exactly the opposite. It's that change in behavior based on comment 10 that I'm most protesting, since I depend on being able to tell portage to go ahead with the merges if they look good (thus the --ask), but under *NO* circumstances do I want it writing its changes to the various use/mask files. >> 5) There needs to be a way to get portage's current emerge --ask >> --autounmask foo (without --autounmask-write) > There is. This doesn't change in my patches. Please read the code or > comment 10[0]. > >> I'd tend to agree, but in that case, why are you wanting to do away >> with the ability to have portage spit out its opinion, without >> having portage actually do the write, while using --ask? > Because it can be done without --ask. See comment 10[0]. The only way you propose to do that in comment 10 is with --pretend, which would be a seriously negative change in behavior for my use-case, since it would require having portage recalculate the dependencies it's just calculated with the --pretend, without it. --ask currently avoids that situation, since when I'm happy with the output, I can simply let it go ahead. > [0] -- 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