[gentoo-user] portage-2.2.0_alpha38 & --depclean

[gentoo-user] portage-2.2.0_alpha38 & --depclean

[Alan McKinnon]

Latest portage-2.2.0_alpha38 has changed something with system set and 
depclean handling. It now shows this:

!!! 'app-editors/nano' is part of your system profile.                                                                                                                                                                                                                        
!!! Unmerging it may be damaging to your system.                                                                                                                                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              
 app-editors/nano
    selected: 2.3.1 
   protected: none 
     omitted: none 

!!! 'sys-apps/less' is part of your system profile.                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
!!! Unmerging it may be damaging to your system.                                                                                                                                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              
 sys-apps/less
    selected: 443 
   protected: none 
     omitted: none 


Changelog doesn't say much about this. I have nano, vim, more and less 
installed and vim is in world. I really don't feel like adding the other three 
since they are already in system (and by definition a subset of world)

Anyone else seeing this?

My profile is default/linux/amd64/10.0/desktop
-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot comg

Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2.0_alpha38 & --depclean

[Dale]

Alan McKinnon wrote:
> Latest portage-2.2.0_alpha38 has changed something with system set and
> depclean handling. It now shows this:
>
> !!! 'app-editors/nano' is part of your system profile.
> !!! Unmerging it may be damaging to your system.
>
>
>   app-editors/nano
>      selected: 2.3.1
>     protected: none
>       omitted: none
>
> !!! 'sys-apps/less' is part of your system profile.
> !!! Unmerging it may be damaging to your system.
>
>
>   sys-apps/less
>      selected: 443
>     protected: none
>       omitted: none
>
>
> Changelog doesn't say much about this. I have nano, vim, more and less
> installed and vim is in world. I really don't feel like adding the other three
> since they are already in system (and by definition a subset of world)
>
> Anyone else seeing this?
>
> My profile is default/linux/amd64/10.0/desktop
>    

I get this:

 >>> These are the packages that would be unmerged:

  x11-misc/notification-daemon
     selected: 0.5.0
    protected: none
      omitted: none


!!! 'sys-apps/less' is part of your system profile.
!!! Unmerging it may be damaging to your system.


  sys-apps/less
     selected: 441
    protected: none
      omitted: none

  media-fonts/dejavu
     selected: 2.32
    protected: none
      omitted: none

  x11-libs/libwnck
     selected: 2.30.6
    protected: none
      omitted: none

  media-libs/libcanberra
     selected: 0.26
    protected: none
      omitted: none

  x11-themes/sound-theme-freedesktop
     selected: 0.7
    protected: none
      omitted: none

  gnome-base/gconf
     selected: 2.32.0-r1
    protected: none
      omitted: none

  gnome-base/orbit
     selected: 2.14.19
    protected: none
      omitted: none

All selected packages: x11-libs/libwnck-2.30.6 media-fonts/dejavu-2.32 
media-libs/libcanberra-0.26 x11-misc/notification-daemon-0.5.0 
gnome-base/gconf-2.32.0-r1 x11-themes/sound-theme-freedesktop-0.7 
gnome-base/orbit-2.14.19 sys-apps/less-441

 >>> 'Selected' packages are slated for removal.
 >>> 'Protected' and 'omitted' packages will not be removed.

Would you like to unmerge these packages? [Yes/No]


Some of that is likely legit but I got the same error you got looks 
like.  Sounds like we better mask this version of portage and maybe get 
out a can of Raid.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2.0_alpha38 & --depclean

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 543 bytes --]

On Tue, 7 Jun 2011 11:10:25 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:

> !!! 'app-editors/nano' is part of your system
> profile. !!! Unmerging it may be damaging to your
> system. 

> !!! 'sys-apps/less' is part of your system
> profile. !!! Unmerging it may be damaging to your
> system. 

> Anyone else seeing this?

No. I don't have nano installed but I do have less. I see that portage
now has a less USE flag, which I disabled


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Walking on water and writing software to specification is easy if they're
frozen.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2.0_alpha38 & --depclean

[Alan McKinnon]

Apparently, though unproven, at 12:54 on Tuesday 07 June 2011, Neil Bothwick 
did opine thusly:

> On Tue, 7 Jun 2011 11:10:25 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > !!! 'app-editors/nano' is part of your system
> > profile. !!! Unmerging it may be damaging to your
> > system.
> > 
> > !!! 'sys-apps/less' is part of your system
> > profile. !!! Unmerging it may be damaging to your
> > system.
> > 
> > Anyone else seeing this?
> 
> No. I don't have nano installed but I do have less. I see that portage
> now has a less USE flag, which I disabled


#370295


-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2.0_alpha38 & --depclean

[Alan McKinnon]

Apparently, though unproven, at 13:36 on Tuesday 07 June 2011, Alan McKinnon 
did opine thusly:

> Apparently, though unproven, at 12:54 on Tuesday 07 June 2011, Neil
> Bothwick
> 
> did opine thusly:
> > On Tue, 7 Jun 2011 11:10:25 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > > !!! 'app-editors/nano' is part of your system
> > > profile. !!! Unmerging it may be damaging to your
> > > system.
> > > 
> > > !!! 'sys-apps/less' is part of your system
> > > profile. !!! Unmerging it may be damaging to your
> > > system.
> > > 
> > > Anyone else seeing this?
> > 
> > No. I don't have nano installed but I do have less. I see that portage
> > now has a less USE flag, which I disabled
> 
> #370295

Zac responded (comment #21) to my post in that bug with quite a well-reasoned 
rationale. It makes interesting reading.


-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2.0_alpha38 & --depclean

[Mark Knecht]

On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 1:33 PM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
<SNIP>
>>
>> #370295
>
> Zac responded (comment #21) to my post in that bug with quite a well-reasoned
> rationale. It makes interesting reading.

It was a good response.

One question left hanging for me goes like this:

I understand nano is a choice. Removing an editor like nano is 99.99%
safe. There's no way removing nano is going to cause a system to not
boot or be unable to do updates, so I remove it understanding (now)
about virtuals. On the other hand how does someone who's not educated
in booting or the internals of portage know that removing less
wouldn't cause a problem that stops a machine from booting or makes it
impossible to do updates?

Cheers,
Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2.0_alpha38 & --depclean

[Alan McKinnon]

Apparently, though unproven, at 22:51 on Tuesday 07 June 2011, Mark Knecht did 
opine thusly:

> On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 1:33 PM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com>
> wrote: <SNIP>
> 
> >> #370295
> > 
> > Zac responded (comment #21) to my post in that bug with quite a
> > well-reasoned rationale. It makes interesting reading.
> 
> It was a good response.
> 
> One question left hanging for me goes like this:
> 
> I understand nano is a choice. Removing an editor like nano is 99.99%
> safe. There's no way removing nano is going to cause a system to not
> boot or be unable to do updates, so I remove it understanding (now)
> about virtuals. On the other hand how does someone who's not educated
> in booting or the internals of portage know that removing less
> wouldn't cause a problem that stops a machine from booting or makes it
> impossible to do updates?

There is always an expectation of the minimum understanding needed to be able 
to use a technical product at all. The use of less and what to do if you don't 
have it falls fair and square into the "you really should already know that to 
use Gentoo" category.

This isn't elitist, it's a technical fact. You have to set the bar somewhere 
and there's nothing wrong with that.


-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2.0_alpha38 & --depclean

[Mark Knecht]

On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
> Apparently, though unproven, at 22:51 on Tuesday 07 June 2011, Mark Knecht did
> opine thusly:
>
>> On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 1:33 PM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com>
>> wrote: <SNIP>
>>
>> >> #370295
>> >
>> > Zac responded (comment #21) to my post in that bug with quite a
>> > well-reasoned rationale. It makes interesting reading.
>>
>> It was a good response.
>>
>> One question left hanging for me goes like this:
>>
>> I understand nano is a choice. Removing an editor like nano is 99.99%
>> safe. There's no way removing nano is going to cause a system to not
>> boot or be unable to do updates, so I remove it understanding (now)
>> about virtuals. On the other hand how does someone who's not educated
>> in booting or the internals of portage know that removing less
>> wouldn't cause a problem that stops a machine from booting or makes it
>> impossible to do updates?
>
> There is always an expectation of the minimum understanding needed to be able
> to use a technical product at all. The use of less and what to do if you don't
> have it falls fair and square into the "you really should already know that to
> use Gentoo" category.
>
> This isn't elitist, it's a technical fact. You have to set the bar somewhere
> and there's nothing wrong with that.

Hi Alan,
   While I agree about setting the bar somewhere I think you sidestep
answering the real question.

   I have no problem with saying someone needs to understand what less
does. less isn't important. It's just the example at hand today. The
'problem' that I'm trying to get closer to answering is how does
anyone other than a Gentoo dev, assuming some reasonable amount of
effort, know that less isn't called by some script somewhere during
the init process? How does one come to understand that maybe less is
just as import as python is to the emerge process?  (and I know it
isn't...)

   What I didn't like about this issue popping up yesterday is that it
altered the idea that average users never touch anything in @system.
Iin fact, TTBOMK I've never in 11 or 12 years of running Gentoo ever
done an emerge -C on a @system package until this morning when I
removed nano.

   Again, I don't disagree at all with your comments.

- Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2.0_alpha38 & --depclean

[Alan McKinnon]

Apparently, though unproven, at 23:39 on Tuesday 07 June 2011, Mark Knecht did 
opine thusly:

>    I have no problem with saying someone needs to understand what less
> does. less isn't important. It's just the example at hand today. The
> 'problem' that I'm trying to get closer to answering is how does
> anyone other than a Gentoo dev, assuming some reasonable amount of
> effort, know that less isn't called by some script somewhere during
> the init process? How does one come to understand that maybe less is
> just as import as python is to the emerge process?  (and I know it
> isn't...)
> 
>    What I didn't like about this issue popping up yesterday is that it
> altered the idea that average users never touch anything in @system.
> Iin fact, TTBOMK I've never in 11 or 12 years of running Gentoo ever
> done an emerge -C on a @system package until this morning when I
> removed nano.

OK, now we're tracking.

In the specific case of less, the answer is self-evident - it isn't needed. A 
dev would just know that. More likely, he would assume he knows that.

In the general case, they suck their thumbs and guess. Some think more than 
others before they guess, they should all do some basic tests to catch severe 
errors before committing changes and additions, and all of them rely on 
unstable users finding other oddities and bugs.

flameeyes gave some hints and clues into how this works on his blog recently:

http://blog.flameeyes.eu/2011/05/25/psa-packages-failing-to-install-with-new-
openrc-based-stages-missing-users-and-groups

It's specific to openrc, but if you follow his blog it's easy to read between 
the lines to see what he's getting at usually.

I don't think I've ever met a dev that releases code any other way :-)

None of the above is fact and all of it is my opinion but I do think I'm close 
to the mark.


-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2.0_alpha38 & --depclean

[Dale]

Alan McKinnon wrote:
> OK, now we're tracking.
>
> In the specific case of less, the answer is self-evident - it isn't needed. A
> dev would just know that. More likely, he would assume he knows that.
>
> In the general case, they suck their thumbs and guess. Some think more than
> others before they guess, they should all do some basic tests to catch severe
> errors before committing changes and additions, and all of them rely on
> unstable users finding other oddities and bugs.
>
> flameeyes gave some hints and clues into how this works on his blog recently:
>
> http://blog.flameeyes.eu/2011/05/25/psa-packages-failing-to-install-with-new-
> openrc-based-stages-missing-users-and-groups
>
> It's specific to openrc, but if you follow his blog it's easy to read between
> the lines to see what he's getting at usually.
>
> I don't think I've ever met a dev that releases code any other way :-)
>
> None of the above is fact and all of it is my opinion but I do think I'm close
> to the mark.
>
>    

OK.  This is todays version.

These are the packages that would be merged, in order:

Calculating dependencies... done!
[ebuild   R   *] sys-apps/portage-2.2.0_alpha38  USE="(ipc) less%* 
-build -doc -epydoc -python2 -python3 (-selinux)" LINGUAS="-pl" 810 kB
[ebuild   R    ] net-print/hplip-3.10.9-r1  USE="X hpcups kde libnotify 
parport (policykit) qt4 -acl% -doc -fax -hpijs -minimal -scanner -snmp 
-static-ppds (-udev-acl%)" 21,307 kB

So, they added a USE flag to get less back on track.  Does that mean we 
can all remove it from world now?

This is not just for me but for others as well.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2.0_alpha38 & --depclean

[Mark Knecht]

On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 3:32 PM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
> Apparently, though unproven, at 23:39 on Tuesday 07 June 2011, Mark Knecht did
> opine thusly:
>
>>    I have no problem with saying someone needs to understand what less
>> does. less isn't important. It's just the example at hand today. The
>> 'problem' that I'm trying to get closer to answering is how does
>> anyone other than a Gentoo dev, assuming some reasonable amount of
>> effort, know that less isn't called by some script somewhere during
>> the init process? How does one come to understand that maybe less is
>> just as import as python is to the emerge process?  (and I know it
>> isn't...)
>>
>>    What I didn't like about this issue popping up yesterday is that it
>> altered the idea that average users never touch anything in @system.
>> Iin fact, TTBOMK I've never in 11 or 12 years of running Gentoo ever
>> done an emerge -C on a @system package until this morning when I
>> removed nano.
>
> OK, now we're tracking.
>

Good.

> In the specific case of less, the answer is self-evident - it isn't needed. A
> dev would just know that. More likely, he would assume he knows that.
>
> In the general case, they suck their thumbs and guess. Some think more than
> others before they guess, they should all do some basic tests to catch severe
> errors before committing changes and additions, and all of them rely on
> unstable users finding other oddities and bugs.
>
> flameeyes gave some hints and clues into how this works on his blog recently:
>
> http://blog.flameeyes.eu/2011/05/25/psa-packages-failing-to-install-with-new-
> openrc-based-stages-missing-users-and-groups
>
> It's specific to openrc, but if you follow his blog it's easy to read between
> the lines to see what he's getting at usually.
>
> I don't think I've ever met a dev that releases code any other way :-)
>
> None of the above is fact and all of it is my opinion but I do think I'm close
> to the mark.

Thanks for the link. It looks interesting.

Cheers,
Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2.0_alpha38 & --depclean

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 805 bytes --]

On Tue, 7 Jun 2011 14:39:34 -0700, Mark Knecht wrote:

>    What I didn't like about this issue popping up yesterday is that it
> altered the idea that average users never touch anything in @system.
> Iin fact, TTBOMK I've never in 11 or 12 years of running Gentoo ever
> done an emerge -C on a @system package until this morning when I
> removed nano.

That's the point though, nano is not a system package, it is not needed
for Gentoo to be usable. You need an editor, but it does not have to be
nano, that is simply the default if the user makes no other choice.

Forcing nano into @system goes against the whole idea of using virtuals
to specify required functionality, rather than requiring a specific
program.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

0 and 1. Now what could be so hard about that?

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2.0_alpha38 & --depclean

[Mark Knecht]

On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Jun 2011 14:39:34 -0700, Mark Knecht wrote:
>
>>    What I didn't like about this issue popping up yesterday is that it
>> altered the idea that average users never touch anything in @system.
>> Iin fact, TTBOMK I've never in 11 or 12 years of running Gentoo ever
>> done an emerge -C on a @system package until this morning when I
>> removed nano.
>
> That's the point though, nano is not a system package, it is not needed
> for Gentoo to be usable. You need an editor, but it does not have to be
> nano, that is simply the default if the user makes no other choice.
>
> Forcing nano into @system goes against the whole idea of using virtuals
> to specify required functionality, rather than requiring a specific
> program.
>

That's what I thought until I moved to the kde profile, at which time
it seems to about 80% of kde-meta became part of @system. Prior to
switching to that profile I think @system as about 150 packages. Today
it's 389:

2stable ~ # emerge -epv @system

These are the packages that would be merged, in order:

Calculating dependencies... done!
[ebuild   R    ] sys-libs/zlib-1.2.5-r2  475 kB
[ebuild   R    ] virtual/libintl-0  0 kB
<SNIP>
[ebuild   R    ] kde-base/kdesu-4.6.2  USE="handbook (-aqua) -debug
(-kdeenablefinal) (-kdeprefix)" 0 kB
[ebuild   R    ] kde-misc/polkit-kde-kcmodules-0.98_pre20101127
USE="(-aqua) -debug (-kdeenablefinal)" 0 kB
[ebuild   R    ] kde-base/khelpcenter-4.6.2  USE="(-aqua) -debug
(-kdeenablefinal) (-kdeprefix)" 0 kB

Total: 389 packages (9 new, 380 reinstalls), Size of downloads: 308,431 kB
c2stable ~ #

My thought at this point is that WRT @system the devs are doing
something magic with Gentoo, taking it in some new direction which I
don't understand yet, and because of that I'm likely to be confused
for some time to come. The idea of a virtual seems very reasonable to
me, but somehow it seems the implementation of it all just isn't as
clear to me as it should be, and the onus is on me to go learn and not
the devs to teach me.

Cheers,
Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2.0_alpha38 & --depclean

[Dale]

Mark Knecht wrote:
> That's what I thought until I moved to the kde profile, at which time
> it seems to about 80% of kde-meta became part of @system. Prior to
> switching to that profile I think @system as about 150 packages. Today
> it's 389:
>
> 2stable ~ # emerge -epv @system
>
> These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
>
> Calculating dependencies... done!
> [ebuild   R    ] sys-libs/zlib-1.2.5-r2  475 kB
> [ebuild   R    ] virtual/libintl-0  0 kB
> <SNIP>
> [ebuild   R    ] kde-base/kdesu-4.6.2  USE="handbook (-aqua) -debug
> (-kdeenablefinal) (-kdeprefix)" 0 kB
> [ebuild   R    ] kde-misc/polkit-kde-kcmodules-0.98_pre20101127
> USE="(-aqua) -debug (-kdeenablefinal)" 0 kB
> [ebuild   R    ] kde-base/khelpcenter-4.6.2  USE="(-aqua) -debug
> (-kdeenablefinal) (-kdeprefix)" 0 kB
>
> Total: 389 packages (9 new, 380 reinstalls), Size of downloads: 308,431 kB
> c2stable ~ #
>
> My thought at this point is that WRT @system the devs are doing
> something magic with Gentoo, taking it in some new direction which I
> don't understand yet, and because of that I'm likely to be confused
> for some time to come. The idea of a virtual seems very reasonable to
> me, but somehow it seems the implementation of it all just isn't as
> clear to me as it should be, and the onus is on me to go learn and not
> the devs to teach me.
>
> Cheers,
> Mark
>
>    

I complained about KDE stuff being in the system set looooong ago.  It 
is because of USE flags that they are being pulled in.  I don't like the 
idea but if you, or a dev, disables all the USE flags that pulls in KDE, 
us KDE users are going to have things breaking left and right.  It 
seemed to have gotten worse when hal bit the dust.  At that point udev 
and other system tools picked up the slack and KDE got pulled into 
system.  That's my theory at least.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2.0_alpha38 & --depclean

[Mark Knecht]

On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 5:33 PM, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
> Mark Knecht wrote:
>>
>> That's what I thought until I moved to the kde profile, at which time
>> it seems to about 80% of kde-meta became part of @system.
<SNIP>
>
> I complained about KDE stuff being in the system set looooong ago.  It is
> because of USE flags that they are being pulled in.  I don't like the idea
> but if you, or a dev, disables all the USE flags that pulls in KDE, us KDE
> users are going to have things breaking left and right.  It seemed to have
> gotten worse when hal bit the dust.  At that point udev and other system
> tools picked up the slack and KDE got pulled into system.  That's my theory
> at least.

I exaggerated. The number of kde packages pulled in on my compute
server right now is about 10, so it's not as bad as I remember.

- Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2.0_alpha38 & --depclean

[Dale]

Mark Knecht wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 5:33 PM, Dale<rdalek1967@gmail.com>  wrote:
>    
>> Mark Knecht wrote:
>>      
>>> That's what I thought until I moved to the kde profile, at which time
>>> it seems to about 80% of kde-meta became part of @system.
>>>        
> <SNIP>
>    
>> I complained about KDE stuff being in the system set looooong ago.  It is
>> because of USE flags that they are being pulled in.  I don't like the idea
>> but if you, or a dev, disables all the USE flags that pulls in KDE, us KDE
>> users are going to have things breaking left and right.  It seemed to have
>> gotten worse when hal bit the dust.  At that point udev and other system
>> tools picked up the slack and KDE got pulled into system.  That's my theory
>> at least.
>>      
> I exaggerated. The number of kde packages pulled in on my compute
> server right now is about 10, so it's not as bad as I remember.
>
> - Mark
>
>    

On mine, kdelibs is one of those, or was last I checked.  It seemed to 
me that the ones that were in there were the larger ones.  What next, 
OOo will be part of system too?  Let's not go there, yet.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2.0_alpha38 & --depclean

[Albert Hopkins]

> I exaggerated. The number of kde packages pulled in on my compute
> server right now is about 10, so it's not as bad as I remember.

I have a bunch of systems (desktop and client) and none of them pull in
any KDE libs save one, which has kde-meta in the world file.  Not even
my mythtv box, which need QT has any kde libs installed.

Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2.0_alpha38 & --depclean

[Mark Knecht]

On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 4:15 AM, Albert Hopkins <marduk@letterboxes.org> wrote:
>
>> I exaggerated. The number of kde packages pulled in on my compute
>> server right now is about 10, so it's not as bad as I remember.
>
> I have a bunch of systems (desktop and client) and none of them pull in
> any KDE libs save one, which has kde-meta in the world file.  Not even
> my mythtv box, which need QT has any kde libs installed.
>

And all of these machines are using the kde profile?

Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2.0_alpha38 & --depclean

[Albert Hopkins]

On Wed, 2011-06-08 at 07:09 -0700, Mark Knecht wrote:
> >> I exaggerated. The number of kde packages pulled in on my compute
> >> server right now is about 10, so it's not as bad as I remember.
> >
> > I have a bunch of systems (desktop and client) and none of them pull
> in

should have been "(desktop and server)"

> > any KDE libs save one, which has kde-meta in the world file.  Not
> even
> > my mythtv box, which need QT has any kde libs installed.
> >
> 
> And all of these machines are using the kde profile? 

Of course not.  Why would you put a server (or anything else) in the kde
profile unless you wanted to pull in KDE stuff?

Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2.0_alpha38 & --depclean

[Mark Knecht]

On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 7:27 AM, Albert Hopkins <marduk@letterboxes.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-06-08 at 07:09 -0700, Mark Knecht wrote:
<SNIP>
>> And all of these machines are using the kde profile?
>
> Of course not.  Why would you put a server (or anything else) in the kde
> profile unless you wanted to pull in KDE stuff?

Then you missed the point of the thread.

Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2.0_alpha38 & --depclean

[Albert Hopkins]

On Wed, 2011-06-08 at 07:37 -0700, Mark Knecht wrote:
> Then you missed the point of the thread.

Quite possibly.

Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2.0_alpha38 & --depclean

[Mark Knecht]

On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 8:38 AM, Albert Hopkins <marduk@letterboxes.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-06-08 at 07:37 -0700, Mark Knecht wrote:
>> Then you missed the point of the thread.
>
> Quite possibly.

Actually, my comment was unfair and I apologize. If you didn't happen
to read every part of the thread then your point is valid. It's
certainly accurate. I believe you about your machines. My machines
which are not KDE profile don't load any KDE libs with @system.

The original point of the thread was in the title and the point I was
commenting about yesterday was really a left turn that I took about
things like KDE packages becoming part of @system, but only when you
choose the KDE profile.

I understand that choosing KDE profile is a choice, and I don't really
care whether a few KDE packages become part of @system doing it.

Again, my apologies,
Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2.0_alpha38 & --depclean

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 809 bytes --]

On Tue, 7 Jun 2011 17:20:57 -0700, Mark Knecht wrote:

> > Forcing nano into @system goes against the whole idea of using
> > virtuals to specify required functionality, rather than requiring a
> > specific program.
> >  
> 
> That's what I thought until I moved to the kde profile, at which time
> it seems to about 80% of kde-meta became part of @system.

That's a completely separate topic, the kde profile, unsurprisingly, sets
the kde USE flag. Then something in system becomes dependent on KDE
packages.

One could even argue that on a KDE system, these are essential packages,
otherwise you lose the explicitly set default UI.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

There was a young man from the border
Who had an attention disorder.
When he reached the last line
He would run out of time
And

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2.0_alpha38 & --depclean

[Todd Goodman]

* Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> [110607 04:42]:
> Latest portage-2.2.0_alpha38 has changed something with system set and 
> depclean handling. It now shows this:
> 
> !!! 'app-editors/nano' is part of your system profile.                                                                                                                                                                                                                        
> !!! Unmerging it may be damaging to your system.                                                                                                                                                                                                                              
>                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
>                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
>  app-editors/nano
>     selected: 2.3.1 
>    protected: none 
>      omitted: none 
> 
> !!! 'sys-apps/less' is part of your system profile.                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
> !!! Unmerging it may be damaging to your system.                                                                                                                                                                                                                              
>                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
>                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
>  sys-apps/less
>     selected: 443 
>    protected: none 
>      omitted: none 
> 
> 
> Changelog doesn't say much about this. I have nano, vim, more and less 
> installed and vim is in world. I really don't feel like adding the other three 
> since they are already in system (and by definition a subset of world)
> 
> Anyone else seeing this?
> 
> My profile is default/linux/amd64/10.0/desktop
> -- 
> alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot comg

I'm seeing it with nano

Todd

Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2.0_alpha38 & --depclean

[Indi]

On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 11:10:25AM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
>
>  sys-apps/less
>     selected: 443 
>    protected: none 
>      omitted: none 
> 
> 
> Changelog doesn't say much about this. I have nano, vim, more and less 
> installed and vim is in world. I really don't feel like adding the other three 
> since they are already in system (and by definition a subset of world)
> 
> Anyone else seeing this?
> 

Yes, I had the exact same thing after moving some things around and
updating yesterday. Then after using --noreplace, there were two others
(I've forgotten them now).  Revdep-rebuild and a reboot appears to have
fixed it.

-- 
klaatu virada nicto

Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2.0_alpha38 & --depclean

[Mark Knecht]

On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 2:10 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
> Latest portage-2.2.0_alpha38 has changed something with system set and
> depclean handling. It now shows this:
>
> !!! 'app-editors/nano' is part of your system profile.
> !!! Unmerging it may be damaging to your system.
>

I saw the same thing here yesterday so I added nano & less to my world
file just so I could move on.

- Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2.0_alpha38 & --depclean

[Walter Dnes]

On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 05:55:38AM -0700, Mark Knecht wrote
> On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 2:10 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Latest portage-2.2.0_alpha38 has changed something with system set and
> > depclean handling. It now shows this:
> >
> > !!! 'app-editors/nano' is part of your system profile.
> > !!! Unmerging it may be damaging to your system.
> >
> 
> I saw the same thing here yesterday so I added nano & less to my world
> file just so I could move on.

  Has anyone ever considered a "virtual/app-editor" ebuild, and letting
vim/joe/nano/whatever satisfy it?

-- 
Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org>

Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2.0_alpha38 & --depclean

[Alan McKinnon]

Apparently, though unproven, at 01:08 on Wednesday 08 June 2011, Walter Dnes 
did opine thusly:

> On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 05:55:38AM -0700, Mark Knecht wrote
> 
> > On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 2:10 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> 
wrote:
> > > Latest portage-2.2.0_alpha38 has changed something with system set and
> > > depclean handling. It now shows this:
> > > 
> > > !!! 'app-editors/nano' is part of your system profile.
> > > !!! Unmerging it may be damaging to your system.
> > 
> > I saw the same thing here yesterday so I added nano & less to my world
> > file just so I could move on.
> 
>   Has anyone ever considered a "virtual/app-editor" ebuild, and letting
> vim/joe/nano/whatever satisfy it?

y'know, now that you mention it:

$ eix -e editor
[I] virtual/editor
     Available versions:  0{tbz2}
     Installed versions:  0{tbz2}(12:10:07 10/06/10)
     Description:         Virtual for editor

$ genlop -t editor
 * virtual/editor
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              
     Mon Aug  4 02:31:59 2008 >>> virtual/editor-0                                                                                                                                                                                                                            
       merge time: 3 seconds.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 


I think the answer is "Yes"

:-)

the virtual satisfies something like 27 different editors

-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2.0_alpha38 & --depclean

[Dale]

Alan McKinnon wrote:
> Apparently, though unproven, at 01:08 on Wednesday 08 June 2011, Walter Dnes
> did opine thusly:
>
>    
>> On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 05:55:38AM -0700, Mark Knecht wrote
>>
>>      
>>> On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 2:10 AM, Alan McKinnon<alan.mckinnon@gmail.com>
>>>        
> wrote:
>    
>>>> Latest portage-2.2.0_alpha38 has changed something with system set and
>>>> depclean handling. It now shows this:
>>>>
>>>> !!! 'app-editors/nano' is part of your system profile.
>>>> !!! Unmerging it may be damaging to your system.
>>>>          
>>> I saw the same thing here yesterday so I added nano&  less to my world
>>> file just so I could move on.
>>>        
>>    Has anyone ever considered a "virtual/app-editor" ebuild, and letting
>> vim/joe/nano/whatever satisfy it?
>>      
> y'know, now that you mention it:
>
> $ eix -e editor
> [I] virtual/editor
>       Available versions:  0{tbz2}
>       Installed versions:  0{tbz2}(12:10:07 10/06/10)
>       Description:         Virtual for editor
>
> $ genlop -t editor
>   * virtual/editor
>
>       Mon Aug  4 02:31:59 2008>>>  virtual/editor-0
>         merge time: 3 seconds.
>
>
> I think the answer is "Yes"
>
> :-)
>
> the virtual satisfies something like 27 different editors
>
>    

Then why didn't they do it that way?  Require a editor but let the user 
pick which one and it be part of the system set.  Maybe I am missing 
something here.  It wouldn't be the first time.  ;-)

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2.0_alpha38 & --depclean

[Alan McKinnon]

Apparently, though unproven, at 02:03 on Wednesday 08 June 2011, Dale did 
opine thusly:

> Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > Apparently, though unproven, at 01:08 on Wednesday 08 June 2011, Walter
> > Dnes
> > 
> > did opine thusly:
> >> On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 05:55:38AM -0700, Mark Knecht wrote
> >> 
> >>> On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 2:10 AM, Alan McKinnon<alan.mckinnon@gmail.com>
> > 
> > wrote:
> >>>> Latest portage-2.2.0_alpha38 has changed something with system set and
> >>>> depclean handling. It now shows this:
> >>>> 
> >>>> !!! 'app-editors/nano' is part of your system profile.
> >>>> !!! Unmerging it may be damaging to your system.
> >>> 
> >>> I saw the same thing here yesterday so I added nano&  less to my world
> >>> file just so I could move on.
> >>> 
> >>    Has anyone ever considered a "virtual/app-editor" ebuild, and letting
> >> 
> >> vim/joe/nano/whatever satisfy it?
> > 
> > y'know, now that you mention it:
> > 
> > $ eix -e editor
> > [I] virtual/editor
> > 
> >       Available versions:  0{tbz2}
> >       Installed versions:  0{tbz2}(12:10:07 10/06/10)
> >       Description:         Virtual for editor
> > 
> > $ genlop -t editor
> > 
> >   * virtual/editor
> >   
> >       Mon Aug  4 02:31:59 2008>>>  virtual/editor-0
> >       
> >         merge time: 3 seconds.
> > 
> > I think the answer is "Yes"
> > 
> > :-)
> > 
> > the virtual satisfies something like 27 different editors
> 
> Then why didn't they do it that way?  Require a editor but let the user
> pick which one and it be part of the system set.  Maybe I am missing
> something here.  It wouldn't be the first time.  ;-)

Yes, you are missing something - what you say is exactly how they now do it.

Previously nano was explicitly in system - set by profile. Now it's the 
virtual. iow, pick the one you want.

This change could only happen now as to do it Zac needed GLEP 37 satisfied 
properly

-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com