On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 06:38:47PM +0100, Michał Górny wrote: > Hi, > > TL;DR: should we depend on setuptools by default? Alternatively, should > we add distutils_enable_setuptools API to provide at least partial > validity checks. > > > Variant 1: automatic dependency on setuptools > ============================================= > Basically, we add a new trinary pre-inherit variable: > > DISTUTILS_USE_SETUPTOOLS=no > -> no deps > DISTUTILS_USE_SETUPTOOLS=bdepend > -> add to BDEPEND (the default) > DISTUTILS_USE_SETUPTOOLS=rdepend > -> add to BDEPEND+RDEPEND > > This is roughly 'erring on the safe side'. The default will work for > the majority of packages. We will have to disable it for setuptools > bootstrap deps, and devs will be able to adjust it to correct values > as they update ebuilds. For the time being, existing *DEPEND > on setuptools will avoid breaking stuff. > > This will also enable me to add extra QA checks to esetup.py. It should > be able to reasonably detect incorrect value and report it. This will > imply some 'false positives' for packages that use the old method of > specifying setuptools in RDEPEND but that's a minor hassle. > > Pros: > - works out of the box for the majority of packages > - enables full-range QA checking > > Cons: > - pre-inherit variable > - some (harmless) false positives on existing packages >
I like variant 1 most since in almost all cases it'll be less work in the ebuilds. What about distutils_optional tho? In tensorflow I have all the python support behind USE="python" and guard all the deps. In the optional case is there any way for this to work other than just setting it to no and doing it manually? I assume if i set it to no and make it optional then the esetup.py checks wouldnt happen which isnt as nice. -- Jason
