-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 25/09/12 12:25 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 12:19:21 -0400 Ian Stakenvicius > <a...@gentoo.org> wrote: >>> a) How do we provide a good user interface for it? It took an >>> awful lot of experimenting to get the exheres-0 suggestions >>> user interface to be good, and it requires quite a bit more >>> information from the package side than this proposal is >>> providing. We want to avoid a REQUIRED_USE here... > >> Standard USE flag interface. This doesn't need anything special. >> Why will a user care if the flag doesn't trigger a package >> rebuild? > > One of the big selling points of suggestions is displaying them to > the user in a useful way (i.e. not via a bunch of einfo messages). > If you're not planning to allow for that, then you're losing a > primary benefit. >
Must've missed that. I don't much care about showing things about optional program interation to users on emerge. In fact I see that as being pretty well useless. Use flag descriptions via metadata.xml , though, are *MUCH* more useful and imo suited entirely to this. (so again, standard use flag interface :) >>> b) How is consistency checking to be done? Related, what >>> happens when a runtime switch introduces a dependency that then >>> requires a non-runtime rebuild of the original package? > >> flag needs to be dropped from IUSE_RUNTIME, so the rebuild would >> occur. > > Uh, you're requiring ebuilds to ensure consistency of every > possible configuration of the entire tree? No, only on a per-atom basis. Maybe I didn't understand what it is you're referring to here. Could you elaborate the issue you are forseeing with a verbose example? >>> c) How do we deal with flag? ( cat/dep[foo] ) or flag? ( >>>> =cat/dep-2.1 ) cases where cat/dep[-foo] or =cat/dep-2.0 is >>> installed and flag is off? From experience, quite a few places >>> where you'd want to use suggestions will break if their >>> suggested package is installed but doesn't meet version or use >>> requirements. > >> Use flag deps are dealt with identically to the way they are now. >> the only difference , again, is that the package doesn't get >> re-emerged. The VDB would still update imo as if the package did >> get re-emerged (ie: USE and RDEPEND would update), to handle the >> use flag change info in metadata but from what I can tell nothing >> else would need to be touched. > > So such packages would just break at runtime? > Again, you lost me. The package is still added to the emerge list same as always, and its dependencies (based on USE) are evaluated same as always. The package just doesn't REBUILD, because a rebuild would not result in any change-on-disk. If there are conflicts in the emerge list then these would be reported just like if IUSE_RUNTIME wasn't used at all...?? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlBh3nIACgkQ2ugaI38ACPCilwD9HbOgxa99t0pRPI/wt4f6zvFT Lsjc140u+i15NIcatM8A/1tTC6LLIIFTBma13I0au9rdFRC9C5+oqTPI3bGpf3bx =0ebw -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
