Re: [gentoo-dev] Dirt: To shove under the rug or not shove under the rug? (aka another round of USE_EXPAND)

2005-09-27 Thread Donnie Berkholz
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jason Stubbs wrote: | On Wednesday 28 September 2005 13:19, Donnie Berkholz wrote: | IUSE="baz bop" | iuse_expand VIDEO_CARDS foo bar This has the ring of hack to me, if it's something to be used in ebuilds. |>In addition, it saves IUSE from having

[gentoo-dev] Re: x86 arch team leads

2005-09-27 Thread Joshua Jackson
Mark Loeser gentoo.org> writes: > > Well, the x86 team has now chosen some leads so we can start getting > everything together as a team. For our leads, we have chosen to have a > "committee" of 4 of us: halcy0n, solar, azarah, and wolf32o2. We each > felt that we didn't have the time or exper

[gentoo-dev] portageq in global scope == die

2005-09-27 Thread Brian Harring
Hola all. The short version of it is that there is no good reason to be using has_version/portageq in the global scope; it's slow, it's not allowed, and any attempts to change metadata via it screw up the build plan. It's really a no go... so next version of portage will trigger an immediate

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dirt: To shove under the rug or not shove under the rug? (aka another round of USE_EXPAND)

2005-09-27 Thread Jason Stubbs
On Wednesday 28 September 2005 13:19, Donnie Berkholz wrote: > Jason Stubbs wrote: > | What are the exact reasons for not wanting to put the expanded flags > | directly into IUSE? If it's just a matter of the horrid display existing > | tools would give, the functionality can go in and IUSE updat

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dirt: To shove under the rug or not shove under the rug? (aka another round of USE_EXPAND)

2005-09-27 Thread Jason Stubbs
On Wednesday 28 September 2005 12:58, Jason Stubbs wrote: > On Wednesday 28 September 2005 00:35, Donnie Berkholz wrote: > > IUSE_VIDEO_CARDS="radeon sis mga" > > IUSE_INPUT_DEVICES="synaptics wacom" > > So, my patch (even though it works) puts these flags into an IUSE_EXPAND > variable and would r

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dirt: To shove under the rug or not shove under the rug? (aka another round of USE_EXPAND)

2005-09-27 Thread Donnie Berkholz
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jason Stubbs wrote: | What are the exact reasons for not wanting to put the expanded flags directly | into IUSE? If it's just a matter of the horrid display existing tools would | give, the functionality can go in and IUSE updated after the functional

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dirt: To shove under the rug or not shove under the rug? (aka another round of USE_EXPAND)

2005-09-27 Thread Jason Stubbs
On Wednesday 28 September 2005 00:35, Donnie Berkholz wrote: > IUSE_VIDEO_CARDS="radeon sis mga" > IUSE_INPUT_DEVICES="synaptics wacom" So, my patch (even though it works) puts these flags into an IUSE_EXPAND variable and would require an upgrade on the CVS server to get correct cache generation

[gentoo-dev] x86 arch team leads

2005-09-27 Thread Mark Loeser
Well, the x86 team has now chosen some leads so we can start getting everything together as a team. For our leads, we have chosen to have a "committee" of 4 of us: halcy0n, solar, azarah, and wolf32o2. We each felt that we didn't have the time or experience to be able to handle being a sole lead

Re: [gentoo-dev] first council meeting

2005-09-27 Thread Marius Mauch
Mike Frysinger wrote: On Monday 26 September 2005 12:01 am, Andrew Muraco wrote: 1) would ?arch become the old ~arch, if it was implemented? 2) would people actually try to run a full ?arch system? 3) #2, would it be possible without breakage? if we went with a testing mask it'd mean that us

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dirt: To shove under the rug or not shove under the rug? (aka another round of USE_EXPAND)

2005-09-27 Thread Jason Stubbs
On Wednesday 28 September 2005 10:23, Jason Stubbs wrote: > On Wednesday 28 September 2005 00:35, Donnie Berkholz wrote: > > What I have done in my ebuilds using USE_EXPAND is add extra IUSE-like > > variables, for example: > > > > IUSE_VIDEO_CARDS="radeon sis mga" > > IUSE_INPUT_DEVICES="synaptics

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dirt: To shove under the rug or not shove under the rug? (aka another round of USE_EXPAND)

2005-09-27 Thread Jason Stubbs
On Wednesday 28 September 2005 00:35, Donnie Berkholz wrote: > What I have done in my ebuilds using USE_EXPAND is add extra IUSE-like > variables, for example: > > IUSE_VIDEO_CARDS="radeon sis mga" > IUSE_INPUT_DEVICES="synaptics wacom" > > for `use video_cards_sis` etc.. > > This would allow for p

Re: [gentoo-dev] default logger

2005-09-27 Thread Alec Warner
Mike Frysinger wrote: On Tuesday 27 September 2005 02:59 pm, Donnie Berkholz wrote: Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | Ok, for those who don't remember... | | In the good old days, syslog-ng was the default. Then, for one of the | releases, the x86 team accidentally included metalog instead of | syslo

Re: [gentoo-dev] default logger

2005-09-27 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Tuesday 27 September 2005 02:59 pm, Donnie Berkholz wrote: > Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > | Ok, for those who don't remember... > | > | In the good old days, syslog-ng was the default. Then, for one of the > | releases, the x86 team accidentally included metalog instead of > | syslog-ng on the distf

Re: [gentoo-dev] default logger

2005-09-27 Thread Donnie Berkholz
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Brian Harring wrote: | Re: it being a temporary change that should be undone, it's been | around long enough I won't call it 'temporary' at this point. Oh, so if we screwed up a year ago, we shouldn't fix it. If you won't call that temporary, I won't

Re: [gentoo-dev] default logger

2005-09-27 Thread Donnie Berkholz
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | Ok, for those who don't remember... | | In the good old days, syslog-ng was the default. Then, for one of the | releases, the x86 team accidentally included metalog instead of | syslog-ng on the distfiles CD, so the default wa

Re: [gentoo-dev] default logger

2005-09-27 Thread Brian Harring
On Tue, Sep 27, 2005 at 01:47:49PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Tuesday 27 September 2005 01:29 pm, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > > On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 11:57 -0500, Brian Harring wrote: > > > I'd rather see reasons listed as to why syslog-ng is a superior > > > default for users who (most likely

Re: [gentoo-dev] default logger

2005-09-27 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 13:47:49 -0400 Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | because someone changed it doesnt mean it should have been changed Ok, for those who don't remember... In the good old days, syslog-ng was the default. Then, for one of the releases, the x86 team accidentally included

Re: [gentoo-dev] default logger

2005-09-27 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Tuesday 27 September 2005 01:29 pm, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 11:57 -0500, Brian Harring wrote: > > Basically... why? > > > > I'm neither advocating being different to be different, nor following > > others so howtos about their stuff fit to ours. I'm after > > the underly

Re: [gentoo-dev] default logger

2005-09-27 Thread Chris Gianelloni
On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 11:57 -0500, Brian Harring wrote: > Basically... why? > > I'm neither advocating being different to be different, nor following > others so howtos about their stuff fit to ours. I'm after > the underlying reasons why general users should be using syslog-ng over > metalog

Re: [gentoo-dev] default logger

2005-09-27 Thread Brian Harring
On Tue, Sep 27, 2005 at 08:27:34AM -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 10:39 +0200, Henrik Brix Andersen wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 27, 2005 at 10:31:04AM +0200, Jan Kundr??t wrote: > > > our documentation [1] lists syslog-ng as the "default" system logger > > > while current profile

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dirt: To shove under the rug or not shove under the rug? (aka another round of USE_EXPAND)

2005-09-27 Thread Brian Harring
On Tue, Sep 27, 2005 at 09:07:00AM -0500, Kito wrote: > [Portage devs please don't throw rocks at me] All out of rocks :/ > My impression of the userland, elibc, and kernel use expanded vars is > it was a quick way to sidestep some of the issues with GLEP22... it > would seem the full keywords

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dirt: To shove under the rug or not shove under the rug? (aka another round of USE_EXPAND)

2005-09-27 Thread Stephen Bennett
Kito wrote: My impression of the userland, elibc, and kernel use expanded vars is it was a quick way to sidestep some of the issues with GLEP22... That was pretty much my thinking when I put them there, yes. It's nothing like an ideal solution, but current portage didn't (and to my knowledge

[gentoo-dev] Re: Dirt: To shove under the rug or not shove under the rug? (aka another round of USE_EXPAND)

2005-09-27 Thread Duncan
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò posted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, excerpted below, on Tue, 27 Sep 2005 12:41:50 +0200: > Saying for example that kdelibs uses kernel_linux can make people think that > kdelibs works ONLY for Linux kernel, while that's not true at all. I see your point on most of your post, b

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dirt: To shove under the rug or not shove under the rug? (aka another round of USE_EXPAND)

2005-09-27 Thread Donnie Berkholz
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Chris Gianelloni wrote: | On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 19:12 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: |>Which leads me to the one thing I didn't say but feel strongest about.. What |>is the real point of USE_EXPAND? What can/does it do that USE flags do not? | | | As far

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dirt: To shove under the rug or not shove under the rug? (aka another round of USE_EXPAND)

2005-09-27 Thread Donnie Berkholz
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jason Stubbs wrote: | Removing the QA check while the QA problem still exists is, in my mind, just | plain ludicrous. Removing the QA check once the QA problem is fixed doesn't | make much sense to me either. However, adjusting the check where necessa

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dirt: To shove under the rug or not shove under the rug? (aka another round of USE_EXPAND)

2005-09-27 Thread Jason Stubbs
On Tuesday 27 September 2005 22:44, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: > On Tuesday 27 September 2005 14:51, Jason Stubbs wrote: > > Variables are _not_ fine. I would think it should be clear to everybody > > by now that ebuilds can not pick random things from the computer they are > > installing on

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dirt: To shove under the rug or not shove under the rug? (aka another round of USE_EXPAND)

2005-09-27 Thread Jason Stubbs
On Tuesday 27 September 2005 21:35, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 18:23 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: > > 1) What to do if nothing is set? > > 2) What to do if an invalid value is set? > > Install everything. If everything cannot be installed, due to > incompatibilities, then die.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dirt: To shove under the rug or not shove under the rug? (aka another round of USE_EXPAND)

2005-09-27 Thread Kito
On Sep 27, 2005, at 8:44 AM, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: On Tuesday 27 September 2005 14:51, Jason Stubbs wrote: Variables are _not_ fine. I would think it should be clear to everybody by now that ebuilds can not pick random things from the computer they are installing on to define ho

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dirt: To shove under the rug or not shove under the rug? (aka another round of USE_EXPAND)

2005-09-27 Thread Chris Gianelloni
On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 15:07 +0200, Thomas de Grenier de Latour wrote: > On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 08:35:43 -0400 > Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Unfortunately, even trying to add -linguas_fr to package.use, > > still results in the French language pack being installed over > > the En

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dirt: To shove under the rug or not shove under the rug? (aka another round of USE_EXPAND)

2005-09-27 Thread Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò
On Tuesday 27 September 2005 14:51, Jason Stubbs wrote: > Variables are _not_ fine. I would think it should be clear to everybody by > now that ebuilds can not pick random things from the computer they are > installing on to define how they will build. If variables are not fine, so can't be find th

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dirt: To shove under the rug or not shove under the rug? (aka another round of USE_EXPAND)

2005-09-27 Thread Thomas de Grenier de Latour
On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 08:35:43 -0400 Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Unfortunately, even trying to add -linguas_fr to package.use, > still results in the French language pack being installed over > the English. This reminds me bug #104573: it was the same problem where some LINGUAS=

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dirt: To shove under the rug or not shove under the rug? (aka another round of USE_EXPAND)

2005-09-27 Thread Jason Stubbs
Before you reply to this.. Can you enlighten me on what the solution to the problem is that you are heading toward? I'm having trouble seeing what your real point is. On Tuesday 27 September 2005 19:41, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: > On Tuesday 27 September 2005 12:12, Jason Stubbs wrote: >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dirt: To shove under the rug or not shove under the rug? (aka another round of USE_EXPAND)

2005-09-27 Thread Chris Gianelloni
On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 19:12 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: > On Tuesday 27 September 2005 18:38, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: > > On Tuesday 27 September 2005 11:23, Jason Stubbs wrote: > > > So what needs to be done to fix it? Well, what is the purpose of > > > USE_EXPAND? Put simply, it is to all

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dirt: To shove under the rug or not shove under the rug? (aka another round of USE_EXPAND)

2005-09-27 Thread Chris Gianelloni
On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 18:23 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: > 1) What to do if nothing is set? Install everything. If everything cannot be installed, due to incompatibilities, then die. > 2) What to do if an invalid value is set? > >a) install everything Install everything. If everything canno

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dirt: To shove under the rug or not shove under the rug? (aka another round of USE_EXPAND)

2005-09-27 Thread Jason Stubbs
On Tuesday 27 September 2005 19:54, Thomas de Grenier de Latour wrote: > On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 18:23:25 +0900 > > Jason Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Bug 23826: Give more visibility to ebuilds variables (ALSA_CARDS, > > etc.) > > So i don't think this bug is really relevant in this discussion

Re: [gentoo-dev] default logger

2005-09-27 Thread Chris Gianelloni
On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 10:39 +0200, Henrik Brix Andersen wrote: > On Tue, Sep 27, 2005 at 10:31:04AM +0200, Jan Kundrát wrote: > > our documentation [1] lists syslog-ng as the "default" system logger > > while current profiles uses metalog (except embedded, default-macos/ppc, > > default-darwin and

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dirt: To shove under the rug or not shove under the rug? (aka another round of USE_EXPAND)

2005-09-27 Thread Thomas de Grenier de Latour
On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 18:23:25 +0900 Jason Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Bug 23826: Give more visibility to ebuilds variables (ALSA_CARDS, > etc.) Just to make it clear if it wasn't: although some comments made it derive toward USE_EXPANDed vars, the above bug was at the begining about advert

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dirt: To shove under the rug or not shove under the rug? (aka another round of USE_EXPAND)

2005-09-27 Thread Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò
On Tuesday 27 September 2005 12:12, Jason Stubbs wrote: > Which leads me to the one thing I didn't say but feel strongest about.. > What is the real point of USE_EXPAND? What can/does it do that USE flags do > not? They are forced by the profile, as we don't want users to go away WITHOUT them when

Re: [gentoo-dev] Questions about XML files used in portage

2005-09-27 Thread Paul de Vrieze
On Tuesday 27 September 2005 10:09, Petteri Räty wrote: > Paul de Vrieze wrote: > > WXS is W3C Xml Schema, so yes. The problem though is that the DTD and the > > schema must be compatible on some level. > > > > Paul > > This is not really a problem because you can validate xml files against > both

Re: [gentoo-dev] default logger

2005-09-27 Thread Paul de Vrieze
On Tuesday 27 September 2005 10:39, Henrik Brix Andersen wrote: > On Tue, Sep 27, 2005 at 10:31:04AM +0200, Jan Kundrát wrote: > > our documentation [1] lists syslog-ng as the "default" system logger > > while current profiles uses metalog (except embedded, default-macos/ppc, > > default-darwin and

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dirt: To shove under the rug or not shove under the rug? (aka another round of USE_EXPAND)

2005-09-27 Thread Jason Stubbs
On Tuesday 27 September 2005 18:38, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: > On Tuesday 27 September 2005 11:23, Jason Stubbs wrote: > > So what needs to be done to fix it? Well, what is the purpose of > > USE_EXPAND? Put simply, it is to allow the user to select one or more > > features of a package fro

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dirt: To shove under the rug or not shove under the rug? (aka another round of USE_EXPAND)

2005-09-27 Thread Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò
On Tuesday 27 September 2005 11:23, Jason Stubbs wrote: > So what needs to be done to fix it? Well, what is the purpose of > USE_EXPAND? Put simply, it is to allow the user to select one or more > features of a package from a list of choices. How is this different to USE > flags? The choices all pe

[gentoo-dev] Dirt: To shove under the rug or not shove under the rug? (aka another round of USE_EXPAND)

2005-09-27 Thread Jason Stubbs
Hello all, To shove under the rug: Bug 62001: Have portage QA checks consider USE_EXPAND Bug 70648: QA warnings about USE_EXPAND-derived use variables Bug 101998: Portage shouldn't warn on missing IUSE for USE_EXPAND To not shove under the rug: Bug 23826: Give more visibility to ebuilds variabl

Re: [gentoo-dev] default logger

2005-09-27 Thread Henrik Brix Andersen
On Tue, Sep 27, 2005 at 10:31:04AM +0200, Jan Kundrát wrote: > our documentation [1] lists syslog-ng as the "default" system logger > while current profiles uses metalog (except embedded, default-macos/ppc, > default-darwin and sparc32). What should be changed, Handbook or profiles? I think we sho

[gentoo-dev] default logger

2005-09-27 Thread Jan Kundrát
Hi, our documentation [1] lists syslog-ng as the "default" system logger while current profiles uses metalog (except embedded, default-macos/ppc, default-darwin and sparc32). What should be changed, Handbook or profiles? [1] http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/hb-install-tools.xml TIA, -jkt --

Re: [gentoo-dev] Questions about XML files used in portage

2005-09-27 Thread Petteri Räty
Paul de Vrieze wrote: > > > WXS is W3C Xml Schema, so yes. The problem though is that the DTD and the > schema must be compatible on some level. > > Paul > This is not really a problem because you can validate xml files against both a DTD and a schema. When you are making the schema you just