[gentoo-user] tabbed x11-terms/rxvt-unicode

[gentoo-user] tabbed x11-terms/rxvt-unicode

[Francesco Talamona]

x11-terms/rxvt-unicode is one of the program I use the most, today I 
lost the ability to have multiple tabs and almost panicked.

I found the solution to have back this essential feature: re-enable 
"perl" USE flag for this package and re-emerge. 

Just wanted to share my experience.
HTH
	Francesco


-- 
Linux Version 3.0.4-gentoo, Compiled #1 SMP PREEMPT Wed Aug 31 07:34:34 
CEST 2011
Two 2.9GHz AMD Athlon 64 X2 Processors, 4GB RAM, 11659 Bogomips Total
aemaeth

Re: [gentoo-user] tabbed x11-terms/rxvt-unicode

[Michael Orlitzky]

On 10/08/11 13:43, Francesco Talamona wrote:
> x11-terms/rxvt-unicode is one of the program I use the most, today I 
> lost the ability to have multiple tabs and almost panicked.
> 
> I found the solution to have back this essential feature: re-enable 
> "perl" USE flag for this package and re-emerge. 
> 
> Just wanted to share my experience.
> HTH

I'm going to start a bug-filing campaign against packages like this some
day. The only description we ever get for use flag foo is 'enable
support for foo', which doesn't tell you anything at all about how it
affects a given package.

There are a number of packages with perl and python use flags where
disabling the use flag will silently disable essential functionality. In
my opinion, the use flag should simply be removed rather than have what
amounts to USE=make_it_work_properly.

I agree with the (default) removal of the perl and python flags:

  http://blog.jolexa.net/

but you should complain about packages that are basically broken without
them.

[gentoo-user] Re: tabbed x11-terms/rxvt-unicode

[Francesco Talamona]

On Saturday 08 October 2011, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 10/08/11 13:43, Francesco Talamona wrote:
> > x11-terms/rxvt-unicode is one of the program I use the most, today
> > I lost the ability to have multiple tabs and almost panicked.
> > 
> > I found the solution to have back this essential feature: re-enable
> > "perl" USE flag for this package and re-emerge.
> > 
> > Just wanted to share my experience.
> > HTH
> 
> I'm going to start a bug-filing campaign against packages like this
> some day. The only description we ever get for use flag foo is
> 'enable support for foo', which doesn't tell you anything at all
> about how it affects a given package.
> 
> There are a number of packages with perl and python use flags where
> disabling the use flag will silently disable essential functionality.
> In my opinion, the use flag should simply be removed rather than
> have what amounts to USE=make_it_work_properly.
> 
> I agree with the (default) removal of the perl and python flags:
> 
>   http://blog.jolexa.net/
> 
> but you should complain about packages that are basically broken
> without them.

I'm not going to complain, though I'm willing to point out (e.g. 
commenting on relevant bug reports) that some packages are affected in a 
bad way by this move. 

To be honest I didn't look for a solution in b.g.o because it was 
straightforward; even if not so manifest for me the link between the 
perl flag and the ability for rxvt to run tabbed (given that it doesn't 
give an error).

I don't want to be blunt, but your plan looks to me quite vague.
My opinion is that some packages should have a different default.

Regards
	Francesco

-- 
Linux Version 3.0.4-gentoo, Compiled #1 SMP PREEMPT Wed Aug 31 07:34:34 
CEST 2011
Two 2.9GHz AMD Athlon 64 X2 Processors, 4GB RAM, 11659 Bogomips Total
aemaeth

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: tabbed x11-terms/rxvt-unicode

[Alan McKinnon]

On Sat, 8 Oct 2011 21:09:48 +0200
Francesco Talamona <francesco.talamona@know.eu> wrote:

> On Saturday 08 October 2011, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> > On 10/08/11 13:43, Francesco Talamona wrote:
> > > x11-terms/rxvt-unicode is one of the program I use the most, today
> > > I lost the ability to have multiple tabs and almost panicked.
> > > 
> > > I found the solution to have back this essential feature:
> > > re-enable "perl" USE flag for this package and re-emerge.
> > > 
> > > Just wanted to share my experience.
> > > HTH
> > 
> > I'm going to start a bug-filing campaign against packages like this
> > some day. The only description we ever get for use flag foo is
> > 'enable support for foo', which doesn't tell you anything at all
> > about how it affects a given package.
> > 
> > There are a number of packages with perl and python use flags where
> > disabling the use flag will silently disable essential
> > functionality. In my opinion, the use flag should simply be removed
> > rather than have what amounts to USE=make_it_work_properly.
> > 
> > I agree with the (default) removal of the perl and python flags:
> > 
> >   http://blog.jolexa.net/
> > 
> > but you should complain about packages that are basically broken
> > without them.
> 
> I'm not going to complain, though I'm willing to point out (e.g. 
> commenting on relevant bug reports) that some packages are affected
> in a bad way by this move. 
> 
> To be honest I didn't look for a solution in b.g.o because it was 
> straightforward; even if not so manifest for me the link between the 
> perl flag and the ability for rxvt to run tabbed (given that it
> doesn't give an error).
> 
> I don't want to be blunt, but your plan looks to me quite vague.
> My opinion is that some packages should have a different default.


A good plan is to give USE flags sensible names. This one describes
what the flag *is*, a good description tells you what the flag *does*.

"USE=perl" tells you squat, you don't even know what effect it will
have. You'd have to read the ebuild and the source to figure that out.

A MUCH better name is "USE=tabs" with a description like this "Provide
multiple tabs, requires perl."

It's really just a different manifestation of the #1 but in almost all
interfaces: exposing the underlying implementation in the interface.

-- 
Alan McKinnnon
alan.mckinnon@gmail.com

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: tabbed x11-terms/rxvt-unicode

[Willie Matthews]

I second this!

On Sat Oct 8 12:23:57 2011, Alan McKinnon wrote:
>
> On Sat, 8 Oct 2011 21:09:48 +0200
> Francesco Talamona <francesco.talamona@know.eu> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Saturday 08 October 2011, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>>>
>>> On 10/08/11 13:43, Francesco Talamona wrote:
>>>>
>>>> x11-terms/rxvt-unicode is one of the program I use the most, today
>>>> I lost the ability to have multiple tabs and almost panicked.
>>>>
>>>> I found the solution to have back this essential feature:
>>>> re-enable "perl" USE flag for this package and re-emerge.
>>>>
>>>> Just wanted to share my experience.
>>>> HTH
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm going to start a bug-filing campaign against packages like this
>>> some day. The only description we ever get for use flag foo is
>>> 'enable support for foo', which doesn't tell you anything at all
>>> about how it affects a given package.
>>>
>>> There are a number of packages with perl and python use flags where
>>> disabling the use flag will silently disable essential
>>> functionality. In my opinion, the use flag should simply be removed
>>> rather than have what amounts to USE=make_it_work_properly.
>>>
>>> I agree with the (default) removal of the perl and python flags:
>>>
>>> http://blog.jolexa.net/
>>>
>>> but you should complain about packages that are basically broken
>>> without them.
>>
>>
>> I'm not going to complain, though I'm willing to point out (e.g.
>> commenting on relevant bug reports) that some packages are affected
>> in a bad way by this move.
>>
>> To be honest I didn't look for a solution in b.g.o because it was
>> straightforward; even if not so manifest for me the link between the
>> perl flag and the ability for rxvt to run tabbed (given that it
>> doesn't give an error).
>>
>> I don't want to be blunt, but your plan looks to me quite vague.
>> My opinion is that some packages should have a different default.
>
>
>
> A good plan is to give USE flags sensible names. This one describes
> what the flag *is*, a good description tells you what the flag *does*.
>
> "USE=perl" tells you squat, you don't even know what effect it will
> have. You'd have to read the ebuild and the source to figure that out.
>
> A MUCH better name is "USE=tabs" with a description like this "Provide
> multiple tabs, requires perl."
>
> It's really just a different manifestation of the #1 but in almost all
> interfaces: exposing the underlying implementation in the interface.
>


-- 

Willie Matthews
matthews.willie@gmail.com
Internet Technology Specialist

-- 

Willie Matthews
matthews.willie@gmail.com
Internet Technology Specialist
(702) 508-8455

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: tabbed x11-terms/rxvt-unicode

[James Cloos]

AM> "USE=perl" tells you squat, you don't even know what effect it will
AM> have. You'd have to read the ebuild and the source to figure that out.

AM> A MUCH better name is "USE=tabs" with a description like this "Provide
AM> multiple tabs, requires perl."

No, that is not a better name for the USE flag.

Anyone who has read the docs for rxvt-unicode knows that the perl
extension is just that, an *extension*.  It is perfectly valid to
configure rxvt-unicode with --disable-perl.  And on some smaller
boxen it may even be necessary.  (Sometimes conserving ram is more
important than extra functionality.)

perl is the right USE flag for rxvt-unciode, and should remain a
USE flag.  It enables much more functionality than just the tabbed
extension, but does so at an expense.  An expense which is easily
noticed on smaller boxen.

-JimC
-- 
James Cloos <cloos@jhcloos.com>         OpenPGP: 1024D/ED7DAEA6

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: tabbed x11-terms/rxvt-unicode

[Alan McKinnon]

On Sun, 09 Oct 2011 12:48:09 -0400
James Cloos <cloos@jhcloos.com> wrote:

> AM> "USE=perl" tells you squat, you don't even know what effect it
> AM> will have. You'd have to read the ebuild and the source to figure
> AM> that out.
> 
> AM> A MUCH better name is "USE=tabs" with a description like this
> AM> "Provide multiple tabs, requires perl."
> 
> No, that is not a better name for the USE flag.
> 
> Anyone who has read the docs for rxvt-unicode knows that the perl
> extension is just that, an *extension*.  It is perfectly valid to
> configure rxvt-unicode with --disable-perl.  And on some smaller
> boxen it may even be necessary.  (Sometimes conserving ram is more
> important than extra functionality.)
> 
> perl is the right USE flag for rxvt-unciode, and should remain a
> USE flag.  It enables much more functionality than just the tabbed
> extension, but does so at an expense.  An expense which is easily
> noticed on smaller boxen.


Fair enough. I suspected the flag might enable plugins and considered
finding out what it actually does. But I didn't bother because I don't
use rxvt myself and that specific wasn't the point of my post anyway.

I still maintain the "perl" is not a good name for that flag. It does
not describe what the flag accomplishes, it describes an implementation
detail of how it is used. USE="perl" communicates very little; it might
communicate a lot to you if you know the guts of the app, but very
little to the casual observer wanting to find out what rxvt is.

I run into this kind of thing all the time, and not just with USE
flags, it's endemic amongst coders. The problem is best described like
so "high level description should expose what your code does, not how it
does it". I understand why coders make this kind of mistake -
expediency. It's easier to re-use the existing perl flag than to make a
whole new one in use.local.desc

For rxvt, a suitable flag name would be "plugins"


-- 
Alan McKinnnon
alan.mckinnon@gmail.com

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: tabbed x11-terms/rxvt-unicode

[Michael Orlitzky]

On 10/09/11 13:53, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> 
> For rxvt, a suitable flag name would be "plugins"
> 

Or if there were some package-specific documentation that said, "perl:
enable the following plugins (written in perl): tabs, transparency, etc."

In fact, that would be my favorite solution.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: tabbed x11-terms/rxvt-unicode

[Pandu Poluan]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 527 bytes --]

On Oct 10, 2011 2:01 AM, "Michael Orlitzky" <michael@orlitzky.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/09/11 13:53, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> >
> > For rxvt, a suitable flag name would be "plugins"
> >
>
> Or if there were some package-specific documentation that said, "perl:
> enable the following plugins (written in perl): tabs, transparency, etc."
>
> In fact, that would be my favorite solution.
>

Agree.

The current USE flags are already proper.

What's lacking is a list of consequences for disabling/enabling each
applicable flag.

Rgds,

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 736 bytes --]

[gentoo-user] Re: tabbed x11-terms/rxvt-unicode

[Francesco Talamona]

On Sunday 09 October 2011, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 10/09/11 13:53, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > For rxvt, a suitable flag name would be "plugins"
> 
> Or if there were some package-specific documentation that said,
> "perl: enable the following plugins (written in perl): tabs,
> transparency, etc."
> 
> In fact, that would be my favorite solution.

How would you call the flag in this case?

Regards
	Francesco

-- 
Linux Version 3.0.6-gentoo, Compiled #1 SMP PREEMPT Sat Oct 8 20:18:59 
CEST 2011
Two 1GHz AMD Athlon 64 X2 Processors, 4GB RAM, 4019.26 Bogomips Total
aemaeth

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: tabbed x11-terms/rxvt-unicode

[Michael Orlitzky]

On 10/11/11 13:58, Francesco Talamona wrote:
> On Sunday 09 October 2011, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>> On 10/09/11 13:53, Alan McKinnon wrote:
>>> For rxvt, a suitable flag name would be "plugins"
>>
>> Or if there were some package-specific documentation that said,
>> "perl: enable the following plugins (written in perl): tabs,
>> transparency, etc."
>>
>> In fact, that would be my favorite solution.
> 
> How would you call the flag in this case?
> 

If there's documentation telling you what the flag does, you can call it
Nancy for all I care.

It's the combination I have a problem with:

a) ambiguous flag name
b) no documentation
c) the flag enables basic functionality (tabs, in this case)

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: tabbed x11-terms/rxvt-unicode

[Michael Orlitzky]

On 10/08/11 15:09, Francesco Talamona wrote:
> 
> I'm not going to complain, though I'm willing to point out (e.g. 
> commenting on relevant bug reports) that some packages are affected in a 
> bad way by this move. 

Comment here? The devs are still CCed even though it's closed:

  https://bugs.gentoo.org/250179


> To be honest I didn't look for a solution in b.g.o because it was 
> straightforward; even if not so manifest for me the link between the 
> perl flag and the ability for rxvt to run tabbed (given that it doesn't 
> give an error).
> 
> I don't want to be blunt, but your plan looks to me quite vague.
> My opinion is that some packages should have a different default.

That bug is for adding IUSE defaults, rather than removing the flag.

[gentoo-user] Re: tabbed x11-terms/rxvt-unicode

[Francesco Talamona]

On Saturday 08 October 2011, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 10/08/11 15:09, Francesco Talamona wrote:
> > I'm not going to complain, though I'm willing to point out (e.g.
> > commenting on relevant bug reports) that some packages are affected
> > in a bad way by this move.
> 
> Comment here? The devs are still CCed even though it's closed:
> 
>   https://bugs.gentoo.org/250179
> 
> > To be honest I didn't look for a solution in b.g.o because it was
> > straightforward; even if not so manifest for me the link between
> > the perl flag and the ability for rxvt to run tabbed (given that
> > it doesn't give an error).
> > 
> > I don't want to be blunt, but your plan looks to me quite vague.
> > My opinion is that some packages should have a different default.
> 
> That bug is for adding IUSE defaults, rather than removing the flag.

Added a brief comment, let's see developers' reaction.

	Francesco

-- 
Linux Version 3.0.6-gentoo, Compiled #1 SMP PREEMPT Sat Oct 8 20:18:59 
CEST 2011
Two 1GHz AMD Athlon 64 X2 Processors, 4GB RAM, 4019.26 Bogomips Total
aemaeth

[gentoo-user] Re: tabbed x11-terms/rxvt-unicode

[Francesco Talamona]

On Saturday 08 October 2011, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 10/08/11 15:09, Francesco Talamona wrote:
> > I'm not going to complain, though I'm willing to point out (e.g.
> > commenting on relevant bug reports) that some packages are affected
> > in a bad way by this move.
> 
> Comment here? The devs are still CCed even though it's closed:
> 
>   https://bugs.gentoo.org/250179
> 
> > To be honest I didn't look for a solution in b.g.o because it was
> > straightforward; even if not so manifest for me the link between
> > the perl flag and the ability for rxvt to run tabbed (given that
> > it doesn't give an error).
> > 
> > I don't want to be blunt, but your plan looks to me quite vague.
> > My opinion is that some packages should have a different default.
> 
> That bug is for adding IUSE defaults, rather than removing the flag.

https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=250179#c16

https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=386827

Cheers
	Francesco
-- 
Linux Version 3.0.6-gentoo, Compiled #1 SMP PREEMPT Sat Oct 8 20:18:59 
CEST 2011
Two 1GHz AMD Athlon 64 X2 Processors, 4GB RAM, 4019.26 Bogomips Total
aemaeth

Re: [gentoo-user] tabbed x11-terms/rxvt-unicode

[Peter Humphrey]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 667 bytes --]

On Saturday 08 October 2011 19:43:53 Michael Orlitzky wrote:

> I'm going to start a bug-filing campaign against packages like this some
> day. The only description we ever get for use flag foo is 'enable
> support for foo', which doesn't tell you anything at all about how it
> affects a given package.

I did file a bug a year or two ago about the almost uselessness of USE flag 
descriptions. It caused a flurry of activity in quite a few packages, but 
conspicuous silence in the rest. Needless to say, the activity soon died 
away and the status quo resumed. Programmers are not writers of English, by 
and large.

-- 
Rgds
Peter		Linux Counter 5290, 1994-04-23

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2956 bytes --]

[gentoo-user] Re: tabbed x11-terms/rxvt-unicode

[Francesco Talamona]

On Tuesday 11 October 2011, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> On Saturday 08 October 2011 19:43:53 Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> > I'm going to start a bug-filing campaign against packages like this
> > some day. The only description we ever get for use flag foo is
> > 'enable support for foo', which doesn't tell you anything at all
> > about how it affects a given package.
> 
> I did file a bug a year or two ago about the almost uselessness of
> USE flag descriptions. It caused a flurry of activity in quite a few
> packages, but conspicuous silence in the rest. Needless to say, the
> activity soon died away and the status quo resumed. Programmers are
> not writers of English, by and large.

Do you remember the bug id?
Cheers
	Francesco

-- 
Linux Version 3.0.6-gentoo, Compiled #1 SMP PREEMPT Sat Oct 8 20:18:59 
CEST 2011
Two 1GHz AMD Athlon 64 X2 Processors, 4GB RAM, 4019.26 Bogomips Total
aemaeth