On 04/03/15 15:57, Mihai Moldovan wrote:
On Wednesday March 04 2015 08:58:17 Chris Jones wrote:
ports themselves cannot opt in or out, and nor should they be able to.
Its up to the user running the port command to decide.
That's too dogmatic. I have presented a case where the options are
either using trace mode to successfully build ports (ports in the
conflicts_build group which conflict with themselves) or fail. In that
case, trace mode has to be forced for this particular port if no
preference has been specified. If the user explicitly disables trace
mode via a command line switch (which does not exist yet, as it's not
the default option or even one that could be enabled within
ports/portgroups...), execution will fail like it does today, but the
request should be honored.
OK, I'll rephrase then. It seems OK for a port to opt into tracemode, if
needed to fix bugs like this, but if the user has tracemode globally
disabled ports should not be allowed to opt out.
Personally though, I still it better to just enabled trace mode by
default globally, which will just naturally soak up all these cases. If
a user then decides to globally opt out, thats their concern.
I'd make one exception from this rule: a setting in macports.conf should
be overrideable by ports/portgroups (especially for the use case I
mentioned when the possible ways to go are TRACE MODE or FAIL.)
This also holds for positive settings for ports, which are known to fail
in trace mode by the maintainer.
I would argue only with the above restriction. Opting in is perhaps
fine, but not out.
Chris
If absolutely need-be, the modes could also be "force-on, on, off,
force-off", but force-on and force-off can be handled by -t (real
"enable trace mode" switch)/-T (currently imaginary "disable trace mode"
switch) just fine, so we don't need anything non-boolean in macports.conf.
On 04.03.2015 11:37 AM, René J.V. Bertin wrote:
You have a lot of faith in this mode, and the extent to which it is possible to
let it handle each and every case appropriately for each and every (potential)
port out there.
Yes, we do. Because trace mode is doing the right thing™. Yes, the name
is kind of misleading. It stems from the fact that it uses the
"darwintrace" library to implement its functionality and override
syscalls (like dtrace.)
It's really a very strict sandbox, though, not a tracing utility per se.
Maybe it is possible so there's indeed no need for allowing opt-out, but as
Mihai also said, there are enough examples of cases where we'd want opt-in (if
the user didn't specify a setting) or at least a warning if the user opted out
but the port requires it.
See above.
Mihai
P.S.: could you please fix your client to not always add "Undisclosed
Recipients: ;"? I have to remove that every single time I answer to any
of your posts.
_______________________________________________
macports-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
_______________________________________________
macports-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
