Hi! On Tue, 01 Aug 2006, Jeroen Roovers wrote: > On Tue, 1 Aug 2006 10:21:53 +0200 > > Idea: should it be more obvious in emerge --info and ebuild > > failure that an overlay is involved? If it's obvious enough, > > I don't see a problem. Also, a command that lists all > > installed packages that come from an overlay might be useful > > (maybe even a sa part of --info). > > emerge --info can easily be forged. I've seen people asking for > help on #gentoo do it a few too many times (some even refuse to > provide it), and have wasted precious minutes not just > wondering what the error messages meant, but also whether I > could trust the user.
I don't doubt your claim, yet I find it incredible. I'm constantly amazed at how stupid some people are. Not to mention how many idiotic assholes are out there. > The only way to have people submit emerge --info properly and reliably > would be to set up an online ticketing system - something like this: > > > # emerge --submit-info > > * sys-apps/portage generates emerge --info output and uploads it > relatively tamper-proof to tickets.g.o, and > > * returns a ticket to the user, a unique number that he or she can > communicate to developers and active users through a URL like > http://tickets.g.o/#ticket-number. > > * --submit-info includes information about the emerge commandline that > was run last and what category/package/version emerge was > building/installing at the time. I think this is a very good idea. Better than mine. > Now, do I appear to sound mistrustful of Gentoo users? Perhaps. > Perhaps, this --submit-info stuff reminds you of Product > Activation routines used by closed source software vendors. > Perhaps you think I am being paranoid. Maybe you think that > FOSS should be a free-for-all exchange of meaningful > information, which I would whole-heartedly agree with - the > information would be meaningless if could not trust it. I think it's critical how you sell this: don't say "this is because we can not trust you" but "this is because it makes it easier for you to send all relevant info". While it may seem phone-home-ish, the contained info is clearly traceable and everybody can see that there's nothing sensitive in there. Feedback agents to which I can have the source are much less suspicious than binary blobs that send gobs and gobs of binary info to their home. > It's a far cry from what Gentoo originally was supposed to be, > I admit. I am not even going to argue that this ticket system > is necessary or should be adopted by all developers once it has > been implemented - it is a means to an end, or perhaps several > ends, none of which are required to further develop Gentoo. Yet I think it's a good idea. Just don't misuse it as a tool to spy on users. *Don't* turn it into something that pulls more info than gentoo-stats (and then some). Regards, Tobias -- You don't need eyes to see, you need vision. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
