From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1QZsta-0003jK-HM for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 23 Jun 2011 23:01:11 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 85F741C165; Thu, 23 Jun 2011 22:56:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from basement.kutulu.org (187.250.102.97.cfl.res.rr.com [97.102.250.187]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40B7F1C165 for ; Thu, 23 Jun 2011 22:56:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (basement.kutulu.org [127.0.0.1]) by basement.kutulu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89C7D112008; Thu, 23 Jun 2011 18:56:20 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at kutulu.org Received: from basement.kutulu.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (basement.kutulu.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LE8RymfTrwvS; Thu, 23 Jun 2011 18:56:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.100.84] (173.221.47.98.nw.nuvox.net [173.221.47.98]) by basement.kutulu.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EFE8D112006; Thu, 23 Jun 2011 18:56:19 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4E03C493.8070401@kutulu.org> Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2011 18:56:19 -0400 From: Mike Edenfield User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110616 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.11 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org CC: Alan McKinnon Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] portage getting mixed up with USE? References: <2869451.8C6Z2vDv6d@nazgul> <4509993.1vgHhyACcR@nazgul> <20110623230600.0a4b2b7c@digimed.co.uk> <3223478.mY2kb5XGVq@nazgul> In-Reply-To: <3223478.mY2kb5XGVq@nazgul> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 218a8aed2ae080dbc918aa0463c41f81 On 6/23/2011 6:31 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote: > On Thursday 23 June 2011 23:06:00 Neil Bothwick did opine thusly: >>>> b) it breaks the way portage displays his informations. >>>> Without >>>> autounmask the display of emerge shows what he is going to >>>> do. With autounmask it shows what needs to be done. >>> >>> >>> >>> That is probably the most evil of all your reasons. There's an >>> old dev joke about The Law Of Unintended Consequences, and it >>> applies here - portage is now suddenly doing something new and >>> 180 different from what it used to do. The normal response if >>> "WTF?" followed by lots of indignation >> >> Ah, the old "we do it that way because that's the way it's always >> been done" argument. Yes, it is different, yes, it may be confusing >> when you first encounter the change - but that doesn't make it bad. > > The thing itself is neither inherently good nor bad. Implementing it > in this way is bad. > > Why? > > Because the behaviour changed to something that is the exact opposite > without any warning. Portage always used to tell what it will do. Now, > simply by leaving the relevant options at the default, it tells me > what it should do. How much more contrary to reasonable expectation > can you get? I thought the old behavior was "portage would tell me why it's not going to do anything", vs. the new behavior of "portage will tell me why it's not going to do anything, plus offer to fix it for me." Unless I'm missing something about the pre-auto-unmask behavior? (Which is entirely likely..) --Mike