Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage performance dropped considerably

[hasufell <hasufell@gentoo.org>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 01/28/2014 06:45 PM, Martin Vaeth wrote:
> hasufell <hasufell@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Many defaults gentoo sets do not have anything to do with
>> default codepaths upstream has tested.
> 
> I disagree: The USE-enabling in ebuilds usually follows upstream. 
> IIRC there was even a policy for gentoo developers which strongly 
> suggested this.
> 

I don't know of any and I strongly disagree with that concept.

>> As above, our defaults are not necessarily following upstream 
>> recommendations/defaults. Apache alone should make you think
>> about that claim.
> 
> I never installed apache. However, especially for packages for
> which the choice of algorithms has to be selected (USE-flags
> thread, jit) or of protocols/interfaces (openssl or gnutls, neon or
> other, sqlite or mysql, openvpn[lzo], qtgui[exceptions], mesa,
> freetype, wine), the installation of tools (utils, examples, tk,
> perl, python) or extensions (tls-heartbeat, introspection, X,
> readline) the defaults usually follow the upstream default or
> recommendation unless there is a severe reason not to.
> 

No, they don't necessarily. There is no consistency about this. It's
up to the maintainer to decide "what most users will want". You want
upstream defaults, others want different things. The decision is made
individually. And profiles totally mess up that concept anyway.

What I was trying to say is: if you allow useflag combinations that
break the package (both in terms of build, runtime or _unexpectedly_
missing features) or break reverse dependencies in those same ways,
then it's a bug, a missing REQUIRED_USE constraint, a missing elog or
whatever.

The whole line of argumentation does not work out anyway, imo.
Thinking that the defaults from e.g. "./configure --help" are what a)
developers have tested most thoroughly and b) users of other distros
like debian, ubuntu etc run... is simply an assumption. Debian rather
goes for enabling whatever they can enable.

Besides that... I run stable arch. And when I have a package that has
severely broken runtime behavior with many useflags disabled (except
for the features I expect to be disabled), then something went
horribly wrong during stabilization.

If we support disabling all useflags on package level (and we do),
then we support disabling all on global level as well. All
_unexpected_ breakage that occurs due to that are ebuild bugs that
have incorrect dependencies or missing REQUIRED_USE constraints.

Defaults are just a usability thing, nothing more.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJS5/H3AAoJEFpvPKfnPDWzGXEH/Aw68GvxkA98GoGfpYeD5jAB
TEc6BE7BXX+SjToZZd2LGvyo0gpzocTwYf0Y2OMkVvlrft1a4LJVPX1pHK8NSPdv
DIl7r+AosUcddBrSI45VuCC53sy66XxUDrsKnuXu1Qm9FlfIHhYTNcfxQM1v4UIx
/IP3X+MzH+kklPnYqzHDwxY+lpS1JB3lCPbYvKoJLvk22s+F9ZMg2zdserWRnSRB
EYKrw7ZbnornP71K7dQykQe0fh9f6d/s1fA56fvQ968Pfa1QIF/7eSd2270GF9Vq
5KTWATp8rThfo9O526+A4bwgceDFe04Ksbf6p1oOjxe6Hn4MIo020YFhVl7HQNg=
=NMPh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----