Re: [gentoo-dev] New, shiny EAPI=5 profiles: volunteer, procedure, preparations
On 02/10/2013 03:45 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > Am Montag, 11. Februar 2013, 00:34:19 schrieb Michał Górny: > >>> >>> actually *do* to one's system? >> >> Out of curiosity, does portage suggest switching to the new profiles >> even if it doesn't support its EAPI? > > Unfortunately, it seems yes. (Feature request?) It's possible to include additional instructions in the deprecated file. All lines after the first one as upgrade instructions. For future portage versions, I've fixed it to behavior better: http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/portage.git;a=commit;h=34d8c817080f34f1a0b44cf05b99beacfc0d6314 This fix updates the profile deprecation warning to look like this: !!! Your current profile is deprecated and not supported anymore. !!! Use eselect profile to update your profile. !!! Please upgrade to the following profile if possible: default/linux/x86/13.0/desktop !!! Unable to parse profile: '/usr/portage/profiles/default/linux/x86/13.0/desktop' !!! ParseError: Profile contains unsupported EAPI '5': '/usr/portage/profiles/eapi-5-files/eapi' * You must update portage before you can migrate to the above profile. * In order to update portage, run 'emerge --oneshot portage'. -- Thanks, Zac
Re: [gentoo-dev] New, shiny EAPI=5 profiles: volunteer, procedure, preparations
On 02/10/2013 03:34 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 17:06:39 -0500 > James Cloos wrote: > >>> "AKH" == Andreas K Huettel writes: >> >> AKH> To be honest I did not really see the necessity since the "big red >> AKH> warning" exactly tells you what to do (and even which profile to >> AKH> pick, which would be more complicated in a news item). >> >> But it doesn't tell one why the change was made, what differences to >> expect once it is done. >> >> What does: >> >> diff -uNr profiles/default/linux/amd64/10.0/eapi >> profiles/default/linux/amd64/13.0/eapi >> --- profiles/default/linux/amd64/10.0/eapi 2009-08-17 14:54:00.0 >> -0400 >> +++ profiles/default/linux/amd64/13.0/eapi 2013-01-20 06:31:02.0 >> -0500 >> @@ -1 +1 @@ >> -2 >> +5 >> >> actually *do* to one's system? > > Out of curiosity, does portage suggest switching to the new profiles > even if it doesn't support its EAPI? Yes, although it's possible to include additional instructions in the deprecated file, as you can see in the code here: http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/portage.git;a=blob_plain;f=pym/portage/package/ebuild/deprecated_profile_check.py;h=2acf8e3c2e189eb76cfda2ad4743ce238fc81230;hb=HEAD It interprets all lines after the first one as upgrade instructions. -- Thanks, Zac
Re: [gentoo-dev] New, shiny EAPI=5 profiles: volunteer, procedure, preparations
Am Montag, 11. Februar 2013, 00:34:19 schrieb Michał Górny: > > > > actually *do* to one's system? > > Out of curiosity, does portage suggest switching to the new profiles > even if it doesn't support its EAPI? Unfortunately, it seems yes. (Feature request?) -- Andreas K. Huettel Gentoo Linux developer dilfri...@gentoo.org http://www.akhuettel.de/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] New, shiny EAPI=5 profiles: volunteer, procedure, preparations
On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 17:06:39 -0500 James Cloos wrote: > > "AKH" == Andreas K Huettel writes: > > AKH> To be honest I did not really see the necessity since the "big red > AKH> warning" exactly tells you what to do (and even which profile to > AKH> pick, which would be more complicated in a news item). > > But it doesn't tell one why the change was made, what differences to > expect once it is done. > > What does: > > diff -uNr profiles/default/linux/amd64/10.0/eapi > profiles/default/linux/amd64/13.0/eapi > --- profiles/default/linux/amd64/10.0/eapi 2009-08-17 14:54:00.0 -0400 > +++ profiles/default/linux/amd64/13.0/eapi 2013-01-20 06:31:02.0 -0500 > @@ -1 +1 @@ > -2 > +5 > > actually *do* to one's system? Out of curiosity, does portage suggest switching to the new profiles even if it doesn't support its EAPI? -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] New, shiny EAPI=5 profiles: volunteer, procedure, preparations
> "AKH" == Andreas K Huettel writes: AKH> To be honest I did not really see the necessity since the "big red AKH> warning" exactly tells you what to do (and even which profile to AKH> pick, which would be more complicated in a news item). But it doesn't tell one why the change was made, what differences to expect once it is done. What does: diff -uNr profiles/default/linux/amd64/10.0/eapi profiles/default/linux/amd64/13.0/eapi --- profiles/default/linux/amd64/10.0/eapi 2009-08-17 14:54:00.0 -0400 +++ profiles/default/linux/amd64/13.0/eapi 2013-01-20 06:31:02.0 -0500 @@ -1 +1 @@ -2 +5 actually *do* to one's system? A useful news item would have explained what was changing, why it was done, and what to expect once one makes the change. -JimC -- James Cloos OpenPGP: 1024D/ED7DAEA6
Re: News item (was: Re: [gentoo-dev] New, shiny EAPI=5 profiles: volunteer, procedure, preparations)
Am Sonntag, 10. Februar 2013, 16:02:55 schrieb Andreas K. Huettel: > Am Sonntag, 10. Februar 2013, 15:15:43 schrieb Markos Chandras:> > > > I suspect most people are interested in understanding what changed > > (since deprecation means that the new thing is better than the old > > one). Moreover, the news item is another way to assure them that > > everything is not as bad as the initial "red warning" might had made > > them think so and "keep calm and use Gentoo" ;-) > > OK, here's a news item (actually two, separate for server and non-server > profiles). Since it's a bit late now, I'll commit this or the improved > version after discussion here in 6h (21:00 UTC) unless there are severe > protests. > And pushed. -- Andreas K. Huettel Gentoo Linux developer dilfri...@gentoo.org http://www.akhuettel.de/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: News item (was: Re: [gentoo-dev] New, shiny EAPI=5 profiles: volunteer, procedure, preparations)
On 10 February 2013 15:02, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > Am Sonntag, 10. Februar 2013, 15:15:43 schrieb Markos Chandras:> >> I suspect most people are interested in understanding what changed >> (since deprecation means that the new thing is better than the old >> one). Moreover, the news item is another way to assure them that >> everything is not as bad as the initial "red warning" might had made >> them think so and "keep calm and use Gentoo" ;-) > > OK, here's a news item (actually two, separate for server and non-server > profiles). Since it's a bit late now, I'll commit this or the improved version > after discussion here in 6h (21:00 UTC) unless there are severe protests. > > -- the non-server profile variant (sparing you a lot of Display-If-Profile > lines) > > Title: New 13.0 profiles and deprecation of 10.0 profiles > Author: Andreas K. Hüttel > Content-Type: text/plain > Posted: 2013-02-10 > Revision: 1 > News-Item-Format: 1.0 > Display-If-Profile: default/linux/alpha/10.0 > Display-If-Profile: default/linux/alpha/10.0/desktop > [...] > Display-If-Profile: default/linux/x86/10.0/desktop/kde > Display-If-Profile: default/linux/x86/10.0/developer > > We have generated a new set of profiles for Gentoo installation. These are now > called 13.0 instead of 10.0. Everyone should upgrade as soon as possible (but > please make sure sys-apps/portage is updated to current stable *before* you > switch profile). > This brings (nearly) no user-visible changes. Some new files have been added > to the profile directories that make it possible for the developers to do more > fine-grained use flag masking (see PMS-5 for the details), and this formally > requires a new profile tree with EAPI=5. > > -- the server profile variant (sparing you the headers entirely) > > We have generated a new set of profiles for Gentoo installation. These are now > called 13.0 instead of 10.0. Everyone should upgrade as soon as possible (but > please make sure sys-apps/portage is updated to current stable *before* you > switch profile). > This brings (nearly) no user-visible changes. Some new files have been added > to the profile directories that make it possible for the developers to do more > fine-grained use flag masking (see PMS-5 for the details), and this formally > requires a new profile tree with EAPI=5. > In the course of this change, the "server" profiles will be removed; they do > not exist in the 13.0 tree anymore. You should migrate to the corresponding > parent profile. This may change the default value of some use-flags. The > specific setting in "server" was > USE="-perl -python snmp truetype xml" > You may want to check the setting of these flags after switching profile, but > otherwise nothing changes. > > > > > -- > > Andreas K. Huettel > Gentoo Linux developer > dilfri...@gentoo.org > http://www.akhuettel.de/ > Looks good to me. Thanks -- Regards, Markos Chandras - Gentoo Linux Developer http://dev.gentoo.org/~hwoarang
Re: News item (was: Re: [gentoo-dev] New, shiny EAPI=5 profiles: volunteer, procedure, preparations)
On 10 February 2013 23:02, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > Am Sonntag, 10. Februar 2013, 15:15:43 schrieb Markos Chandras:> >> I suspect most people are interested in understanding what changed >> (since deprecation means that the new thing is better than the old >> one). Moreover, the news item is another way to assure them that >> everything is not as bad as the initial "red warning" might had made >> them think so and "keep calm and use Gentoo" ;-) > > OK, here's a news item (actually two, separate for server and non-server > profiles). Since it's a bit late now, I'll commit this or the improved version > after discussion here in 6h (21:00 UTC) unless there are severe protests. > > -- the non-server profile variant (sparing you a lot of Display-If-Profile > lines) > > Title: New 13.0 profiles and deprecation of 10.0 profiles > Author: Andreas K. Hüttel > Content-Type: text/plain > Posted: 2013-02-10 > Revision: 1 > News-Item-Format: 1.0 > Display-If-Profile: default/linux/alpha/10.0 > Display-If-Profile: default/linux/alpha/10.0/desktop > [...] > Display-If-Profile: default/linux/x86/10.0/desktop/kde > Display-If-Profile: default/linux/x86/10.0/developer > > We have generated a new set of profiles for Gentoo installation. These are now > called 13.0 instead of 10.0. Everyone should upgrade as soon as possible (but > please make sure sys-apps/portage is updated to current stable *before* you > switch profile). > This brings (nearly) no user-visible changes. Some new files have been added > to the profile directories that make it possible for the developers to do more > fine-grained use flag masking (see PMS-5 for the details), and this formally > requires a new profile tree with EAPI=5. > > -- the server profile variant (sparing you the headers entirely) > > We have generated a new set of profiles for Gentoo installation. These are now > called 13.0 instead of 10.0. Everyone should upgrade as soon as possible (but > please make sure sys-apps/portage is updated to current stable *before* you > switch profile). > This brings (nearly) no user-visible changes. Some new files have been added > to the profile directories that make it possible for the developers to do more > fine-grained use flag masking (see PMS-5 for the details), and this formally > requires a new profile tree with EAPI=5. > In the course of this change, the "server" profiles will be removed; they do > not exist in the 13.0 tree anymore. You should migrate to the corresponding > parent profile. This may change the default value of some use-flags. The > specific setting in "server" was > USE="-perl -python snmp truetype xml" > You may want to check the setting of these flags after switching profile, but > otherwise nothing changes. > > > > > -- > > Andreas K. Huettel > Gentoo Linux developer > dilfri...@gentoo.org > http://www.akhuettel.de/ > Looks good to me! -- Cheers, Ben | yngwin Gentoo developer Gentoo Qt project lead, Gentoo Wiki admin
Re: [gentoo-dev] New, shiny EAPI=5 profiles: volunteer, procedure, preparations
Am Sonntag, 10. Februar 2013, 15:59:57 schrieb Patrick Nagel: > > Actually, if you could add a note that before switching to the new profile, > you should update portage if it's old, that would be even more > user-friendly: > Already done, see separate mail... -- Andreas K. Huettel Gentoo Linux developer dilfri...@gentoo.org http://www.akhuettel.de/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
News item (was: Re: [gentoo-dev] New, shiny EAPI=5 profiles: volunteer, procedure, preparations)
Am Sonntag, 10. Februar 2013, 15:15:43 schrieb Markos Chandras:> > I suspect most people are interested in understanding what changed > (since deprecation means that the new thing is better than the old > one). Moreover, the news item is another way to assure them that > everything is not as bad as the initial "red warning" might had made > them think so and "keep calm and use Gentoo" ;-) OK, here's a news item (actually two, separate for server and non-server profiles). Since it's a bit late now, I'll commit this or the improved version after discussion here in 6h (21:00 UTC) unless there are severe protests. -- the non-server profile variant (sparing you a lot of Display-If-Profile lines) Title: New 13.0 profiles and deprecation of 10.0 profiles Author: Andreas K. Hüttel Content-Type: text/plain Posted: 2013-02-10 Revision: 1 News-Item-Format: 1.0 Display-If-Profile: default/linux/alpha/10.0 Display-If-Profile: default/linux/alpha/10.0/desktop [...] Display-If-Profile: default/linux/x86/10.0/desktop/kde Display-If-Profile: default/linux/x86/10.0/developer We have generated a new set of profiles for Gentoo installation. These are now called 13.0 instead of 10.0. Everyone should upgrade as soon as possible (but please make sure sys-apps/portage is updated to current stable *before* you switch profile). This brings (nearly) no user-visible changes. Some new files have been added to the profile directories that make it possible for the developers to do more fine-grained use flag masking (see PMS-5 for the details), and this formally requires a new profile tree with EAPI=5. -- the server profile variant (sparing you the headers entirely) We have generated a new set of profiles for Gentoo installation. These are now called 13.0 instead of 10.0. Everyone should upgrade as soon as possible (but please make sure sys-apps/portage is updated to current stable *before* you switch profile). This brings (nearly) no user-visible changes. Some new files have been added to the profile directories that make it possible for the developers to do more fine-grained use flag masking (see PMS-5 for the details), and this formally requires a new profile tree with EAPI=5. In the course of this change, the "server" profiles will be removed; they do not exist in the 13.0 tree anymore. You should migrate to the corresponding parent profile. This may change the default value of some use-flags. The specific setting in "server" was USE="-perl -python snmp truetype xml" You may want to check the setting of these flags after switching profile, but otherwise nothing changes. -- Andreas K. Huettel Gentoo Linux developer dilfri...@gentoo.org http://www.akhuettel.de/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] New, shiny EAPI=5 profiles: volunteer, procedure, preparations
Hi, On 2013-02-10 22:06, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > Am Sonntag, 10. Februar 2013, 14:34:14 schrieb Markos Chandras: new profiles? As a Gentoo user who just got a giant red warning from portage that his active profile was deprecated, I feel like many people are going to be confused about this. >>> >>> Obviously a news item should precede any deprecation of stable profiles. >>> >> >> I think it is too late now. The big red warning is already there. > > To be honest I did not really see the necessity since the "big red warning" > exactly tells you what to do (and even which profile to pick, which would be > more complicated in a news item). > > Then again, that's a matter of personal preference, too. Actually, if you could add a note that before switching to the new profile, you should update portage if it's old, that would be even more user-friendly: I just saw the big red warning on a not-so-well-maintained Gentoo box today, switched to the new profile, and then portage would only do read-only operations. So I had to figure out how to change the profile back manually (because the old profile also isn't shown in eselect anymore), before I could update portage and then switch to the new profile again. Patrick.
Re: [gentoo-dev] New, shiny EAPI=5 profiles: volunteer, procedure, preparations
On 10 February 2013 14:06, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > Am Sonntag, 10. Februar 2013, 14:34:14 schrieb Markos Chandras: >> > > new profiles? As a Gentoo user who just got a giant red warning from >> > > portage that his active profile was deprecated, I feel like many people >> > > are going to be confused about this. >> > >> > Obviously a news item should precede any deprecation of stable profiles. >> > >> >> I think it is too late now. The big red warning is already there. > > To be honest I did not really see the necessity since the "big red warning" > exactly tells you what to do (and even which profile to pick, which would be > more complicated in a news item). > > Then again, that's a matter of personal preference, too. > > -- > > Andreas K. Huettel > Gentoo Linux developer > dilfri...@gentoo.org > http://www.akhuettel.de/ > I suspect most people are interested in understanding what changed (since deprecation means that the new thing is better than the old one). Moreover, the news item is another way to assure them that everything is not as bad as the initial "red warning" might had made them think so and "keep calm and use Gentoo" ;-) -- Regards, Markos Chandras - Gentoo Linux Developer http://dev.gentoo.org/~hwoarang
Re: [gentoo-dev] New, shiny EAPI=5 profiles: volunteer, procedure, preparations
Am Sonntag, 10. Februar 2013, 14:34:14 schrieb Markos Chandras: > > > new profiles? As a Gentoo user who just got a giant red warning from > > > portage that his active profile was deprecated, I feel like many people > > > are going to be confused about this. > > > > Obviously a news item should precede any deprecation of stable profiles. > > > > I think it is too late now. The big red warning is already there. To be honest I did not really see the necessity since the "big red warning" exactly tells you what to do (and even which profile to pick, which would be more complicated in a news item). Then again, that's a matter of personal preference, too. -- Andreas K. Huettel Gentoo Linux developer dilfri...@gentoo.org http://www.akhuettel.de/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] New, shiny EAPI=5 profiles: volunteer, procedure, preparations
On Feb 10, 2013 8:32 AM, "Ben de Groot" wrote: > > On 10 February 2013 10:43, Douglas Freed wrote: > >> * all 13.0 profiles have been created and are marked stable the same way > >> as > >> 10.0 was > >> * all 10.0 profiles have been removed from profiles.desc > >> * all 10.0 profiles have been deprecated > > > > Suggestion: perhaps a news item should be created for the migration to the > > new profiles? As a Gentoo user who just got a giant red warning from > > portage that his active profile was deprecated, I feel like many people are > > going to be confused about this. > > > > -Doug > > Obviously a news item should precede any deprecation of stable profiles. > > -- > Cheers, > > Ben | yngwin > Gentoo developer > Gentoo Qt project lead, Gentoo Wiki admin > I think it is too late now. The big red warning is already there.
Re: [gentoo-dev] New, shiny EAPI=5 profiles: volunteer, procedure, preparations
On 10 February 2013 10:43, Douglas Freed wrote: >> * all 13.0 profiles have been created and are marked stable the same way >> as >> 10.0 was >> * all 10.0 profiles have been removed from profiles.desc >> * all 10.0 profiles have been deprecated > > Suggestion: perhaps a news item should be created for the migration to the > new profiles? As a Gentoo user who just got a giant red warning from > portage that his active profile was deprecated, I feel like many people are > going to be confused about this. > > -Doug Obviously a news item should precede any deprecation of stable profiles. -- Cheers, Ben | yngwin Gentoo developer Gentoo Qt project lead, Gentoo Wiki admin
Re: [gentoo-dev] New, shiny EAPI=5 profiles: volunteer, procedure, preparations
> * all 13.0 profiles have been created and are marked stable the same way as > 10.0 was > * all 10.0 profiles have been removed from profiles.desc > * all 10.0 profiles have been deprecated Suggestion: perhaps a news item should be created for the migration to the new profiles? As a Gentoo user who just got a giant red warning from portage that his active profile was deprecated, I feel like many people are going to be confused about this. -Doug
Re: [gentoo-dev] New, shiny EAPI=5 profiles: volunteer, procedure, preparations
For your information, in the default/linux tree
* all 13.0 profiles have been created and are marked stable the same way as
10.0 was
* all 10.0 profiles have been removed from profiles.desc
* all 10.0 profiles have been deprecated
IMHO the waiting time of 1 year decided by Council starts now before we can
remove the 10.0 trees.
Maintainers of profiles outside default/linux (e.g. hardened and prefix),
please take care of the migration to EAPI=5 on your own.
Everyone else, have fun! :)
Am Samstag, 12. Januar 2013, 21:47:18 schrieb Andreas K. Huettel:
> Hi everyone,
>
> since Council has approved the creation of a fresh set of EAPI=5 "13.0"
> profiles, I would like to volunteer for creating them. The proposed
> procedure is outlined below in detail, and I'd be happy for comments.
> [If anything below deviates from Council decision, please tell me- not my
> intention.]
>
> One general question comes first, though: Right now, the releases/10.0
> profile directory does the following things:
> * mask too-old portage
> * set eapi
> * add USE=bzip2
>
> Is there anything unrelated to EAPI=5 that absolutely must be added to the
> new releases/13.0 directory in addition in your opinion? (Whether this is
> the right place and was the right place in the beginning for USE=bzip2 is
> another question.)
>
> ###
>
> The procedure (all paths relative to profiles):
>
> 1) create directory eapi-5-files, with eapi (containing 5), skeletons for
> package.stable.mask etc and a readme
>
> 2) copy releases/10.0 to releases/13.0, in releases/13.0:
> * increase required portage version
> * additionally inherit ../../eapi-5-files
> * other changes as per question above?
>
> 3) for each arch in default/linux,
> * announce on arch alias (to prevent overlapping commits)
> * copy default/linux/${arch}/10.0 to default/linux/${arch}/13.0 and
> * change inheritance in the new copy to inherit ../../../../releases/13.0
> instead of ../../../../releases/10.0
> * announce on arch alias (so future changes go into 13.0 tree)
> [This describes the simple case. I realize that there are differences in
> the directory structure, e.g. powerpc/ppc64/10.0, which is why this step
> needs extra care.]
>
> 4) edit profiles.desc and copy all "10.0 lines" to "13.0 lines", with an
> initial setting "dev" (if dev or stable before) or "exp" (if exp before)
> This makes repoman check against the new profiles when using developer
> profiles.
>
> 5) announce the state on the dev list, urging devs to update their symlink
> manually and !test!
>
> 6) wait one / two weeks
>
> 7) in profiles.desc, mark all 13.0 profiles stable that were stable in
> 10.0, and remove the lines for the 10.0 profiles. This makes eselect
> profile now only offer the new ones, and repoman test by default against
> 13.0 profiles.
>
> 8) mark all 10.0 profiles as deprecated by creating a "deprecated" file
> (containing the replacement suggestion) in the directory. This makes
> portage warn users to upgrade (suggesting a new profile for them), and
> repoman ignore the 10.0 profiles.
>
> 9) long waiting time as decided by Council
>
> ###
>
> Everything that does NOT use/inherit 10.0 will remain unaffected, and
> whoever responsible may have to take care of that some time before (in
> step 10) the main profile directory becomes EAPI=5. This means e.g.
> hardened, ulibc, prefix or bsd.
>
> Cheers,
> Andreas
--
Andreas K. Huettel
Gentoo Linux developer
dilfri...@gentoo.org
http://www.akhuettel.de/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] New, shiny EAPI=5 profiles: volunteer, procedure, preparations
On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 00:26:38 +0100 "Andreas K. Huettel" wrote: > Just to keep everyone updated, ... > > > FYI, the new 13.0 profiles are now all available in profiles.desc, for now > > all with status "dev" (i.e. repoman includes them only when you request > > developer profile checking). > > > > This means the procedure below is complete up to and including point 5) > > now. > > > > Please consider changing your profile symlink manually and testing the new > > profile tree. In case of problems, please file a bug and assign it to me > > (or tell me if I'm around). > > > > If all goes well, we'll continue in a week. > > > > A small bug in repoman turned up when testing the EAPI=5 profiles, and > therefore we will wait for the next stable portage version before the 10.0 > profiles are deprecated. So, another 3-4 weeks to go maybe. > > [The only alternative would be to require all devs to run at least ~arch > portage, since the bug only affects repoman, not emerge.] To be honest, I don't think this is really a blocker to deprecating the old profiles, unless you're talking about other bug than the one I filed. That bug just caused repoman to error about unstable dependencies when flags were stable-masked. This just means that developers with old repoman won't be able to commit stable ebuilds using stable-masked flags. Note that using the old profiles workarounds the issue through having those flags completely masked and therefore devs having no repoman checks on their dependencies at all... -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] New, shiny EAPI=5 profiles: volunteer, procedure, preparations
On 01/27/2013 03:26 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote: > El dom, 27-01-2013 a las 00:26 +0100, Andreas K. Huettel escribió: >> Just to keep everyone updated, ... >> >>> FYI, the new 13.0 profiles are now all available in profiles.desc, for now >>> all with status "dev" (i.e. repoman includes them only when you request >>> developer profile checking). >>> >>> This means the procedure below is complete up to and including point 5) >>> now. >>> >>> Please consider changing your profile symlink manually and testing the new >>> profile tree. In case of problems, please file a bug and assign it to me >>> (or tell me if I'm around). >>> >>> If all goes well, we'll continue in a week. >>> >> >> A small bug in repoman turned up when testing the EAPI=5 profiles, and >> therefore we will wait for the next stable portage version before the 10.0 >> profiles are deprecated. So, another 3-4 weeks to go maybe. >> >> [The only alternative would be to require all devs to run at least ~arch >> portage, since the bug only affects repoman, not emerge.] >> >> Cheers, >> Andreas >> > > Maybe other option would be to have a portage version like current > stable + repoman fix and fast stabilize as soon as possible I think the latest portage release (2.1.11.50) should be fine. It has lots of other fixes that will be nice to have in stable. I plan to file a stable request in about 1.5 weeks. -- Thanks, Zac
Re: [gentoo-dev] New, shiny EAPI=5 profiles: volunteer, procedure, preparations
El dom, 27-01-2013 a las 00:26 +0100, Andreas K. Huettel escribió: > Just to keep everyone updated, ... > > > FYI, the new 13.0 profiles are now all available in profiles.desc, for now > > all with status "dev" (i.e. repoman includes them only when you request > > developer profile checking). > > > > This means the procedure below is complete up to and including point 5) > > now. > > > > Please consider changing your profile symlink manually and testing the new > > profile tree. In case of problems, please file a bug and assign it to me > > (or tell me if I'm around). > > > > If all goes well, we'll continue in a week. > > > > A small bug in repoman turned up when testing the EAPI=5 profiles, and > therefore we will wait for the next stable portage version before the 10.0 > profiles are deprecated. So, another 3-4 weeks to go maybe. > > [The only alternative would be to require all devs to run at least ~arch > portage, since the bug only affects repoman, not emerge.] > > Cheers, > Andreas > Maybe other option would be to have a portage version like current stable + repoman fix and fast stabilize as soon as possible signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] New, shiny EAPI=5 profiles: volunteer, procedure, preparations
Just to keep everyone updated, ... > FYI, the new 13.0 profiles are now all available in profiles.desc, for now > all with status "dev" (i.e. repoman includes them only when you request > developer profile checking). > > This means the procedure below is complete up to and including point 5) > now. > > Please consider changing your profile symlink manually and testing the new > profile tree. In case of problems, please file a bug and assign it to me > (or tell me if I'm around). > > If all goes well, we'll continue in a week. > A small bug in repoman turned up when testing the EAPI=5 profiles, and therefore we will wait for the next stable portage version before the 10.0 profiles are deprecated. So, another 3-4 weeks to go maybe. [The only alternative would be to require all devs to run at least ~arch portage, since the bug only affects repoman, not emerge.] Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas K. Huettel Gentoo Linux developer dilfri...@gentoo.org http://www.akhuettel.de/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] New, shiny EAPI=5 profiles: volunteer, procedure, preparations
On Sat, 19 Jan 2013 00:47:09 +0100 "Andreas K. Huettel" wrote: > Am Freitag, 18. Januar 2013, 23:20:50 schrieben Sie: > > On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 21:37:10 +0100 > > > > "Andreas K. Huettel" wrote: > > > FYI, the new 13.0 profiles are now all available in profiles.desc, for > > > now all with status "dev" (i.e. repoman includes them only when you > > > request developer profile checking). > > > > > > This means the procedure below is complete up to and including point 5) > > > now. > > > > > > Please consider changing your profile symlink manually and testing the > > > new profile tree. In case of problems, please file a bug and assign it > > > to me (or tell me if I'm around). > > > > > > If all goes well, we'll continue in a week. > > > > Hmm, I think we need a bit more fine-grained EAPI=5 directories, at > > least for arch-specific unmasks. Not sure if I shall use the > > arch-specific 13.0 profiles or something more common shall be > > introduced. > > I think it's perfectly fine now to raise the EAPI to 5 anywhere in the > profile > trees that (also) inherit 13.0 (since they need it anyway). > > So, in my opinion, we can just do that wherever needed. > > The intention of the "eapi-5-files" directory is just to hold the files that > will be moved into global scale once the old profiles are gone. Well, in this particular case I'm wondering if there shouldn't be a similar solution for the arch/*. In other words arch/*/eapi-5-files which will be moved to main arch scope once the old profiles are gone. But I guess we could just move the files from default/linux/*/13.0. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] New, shiny EAPI=5 profiles: volunteer, procedure, preparations
Am Freitag, 18. Januar 2013, 23:20:50 schrieben Sie: > On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 21:37:10 +0100 > > "Andreas K. Huettel" wrote: > > FYI, the new 13.0 profiles are now all available in profiles.desc, for > > now all with status "dev" (i.e. repoman includes them only when you > > request developer profile checking). > > > > This means the procedure below is complete up to and including point 5) > > now. > > > > Please consider changing your profile symlink manually and testing the > > new profile tree. In case of problems, please file a bug and assign it > > to me (or tell me if I'm around). > > > > If all goes well, we'll continue in a week. > > Hmm, I think we need a bit more fine-grained EAPI=5 directories, at > least for arch-specific unmasks. Not sure if I shall use the > arch-specific 13.0 profiles or something more common shall be > introduced. I think it's perfectly fine now to raise the EAPI to 5 anywhere in the profile trees that (also) inherit 13.0 (since they need it anyway). So, in my opinion, we can just do that wherever needed. The intention of the "eapi-5-files" directory is just to hold the files that will be moved into global scale once the old profiles are gone. -- Andreas K. Huettel Gentoo Linux developer dilfri...@gentoo.org http://www.akhuettel.de/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] New, shiny EAPI=5 profiles: volunteer, procedure, preparations
On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 21:37:10 +0100 "Andreas K. Huettel" wrote: > > FYI, the new 13.0 profiles are now all available in profiles.desc, for now > all > with status "dev" (i.e. repoman includes them only when you request developer > profile checking). > > This means the procedure below is complete up to and including point 5) now. > > Please consider changing your profile symlink manually and testing the new > profile tree. In case of problems, please file a bug and assign it to me (or > tell me if I'm around). > > If all goes well, we'll continue in a week. Hmm, I think we need a bit more fine-grained EAPI=5 directories, at least for arch-specific unmasks. Not sure if I shall use the arch-specific 13.0 profiles or something more common shall be introduced. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] New, shiny EAPI=5 profiles: volunteer, procedure, preparations
FYI, the new 13.0 profiles are now all available in profiles.desc, for now all
with status "dev" (i.e. repoman includes them only when you request developer
profile checking).
This means the procedure below is complete up to and including point 5) now.
Please consider changing your profile symlink manually and testing the new
profile tree. In case of problems, please file a bug and assign it to me (or
tell me if I'm around).
If all goes well, we'll continue in a week.
Cheers,
Andreas
Am Samstag, 12. Januar 2013, 21:47:18 schrieb Andreas K. Huettel:
> Hi everyone,
>
> since Council has approved the creation of a fresh set of EAPI=5 "13.0"
> profiles, I would like to volunteer for creating them. The proposed
> procedure is outlined below in detail, and I'd be happy for comments.
> [If anything below deviates from Council decision, please tell me- not my
> intention.]
>
> One general question comes first, though: Right now, the releases/10.0
> profile directory does the following things:
> * mask too-old portage
> * set eapi
> * add USE=bzip2
>
> Is there anything unrelated to EAPI=5 that absolutely must be added to the
> new releases/13.0 directory in addition in your opinion? (Whether this is
> the right place and was the right place in the beginning for USE=bzip2 is
> another question.)
>
> ###
>
> The procedure (all paths relative to profiles):
>
> 1) create directory eapi-5-files, with eapi (containing 5), skeletons for
> package.stable.mask etc and a readme
>
> 2) copy releases/10.0 to releases/13.0, in releases/13.0:
> * increase required portage version
> * additionally inherit ../../eapi-5-files
> * other changes as per question above?
>
> 3) for each arch in default/linux,
> * announce on arch alias (to prevent overlapping commits)
> * copy default/linux/${arch}/10.0 to default/linux/${arch}/13.0 and
> * change inheritance in the new copy to inherit ../../../../releases/13.0
> instead of ../../../../releases/10.0
> * announce on arch alias (so future changes go into 13.0 tree)
> [This describes the simple case. I realize that there are differences in
> the directory structure, e.g. powerpc/ppc64/10.0, which is why this step
> needs extra care.]
>
> 4) edit profiles.desc and copy all "10.0 lines" to "13.0 lines", with an
> initial setting "dev" (if dev or stable before) or "exp" (if exp before)
> This makes repoman check against the new profiles when using developer
> profiles.
>
> 5) announce the state on the dev list, urging devs to update their symlink
> manually and !test!
>
> 6) wait one / two weeks
>
> 7) in profiles.desc, mark all 13.0 profiles stable that were stable in
> 10.0, and remove the lines for the 10.0 profiles. This makes eselect
> profile now only offer the new ones, and repoman test by default against
> 13.0 profiles.
>
> 8) mark all 10.0 profiles as deprecated by creating a "deprecated" file
> (containing the replacement suggestion) in the directory. This makes
> portage warn users to upgrade (suggesting a new profile for them), and
> repoman ignore the 10.0 profiles.
>
> 9) long waiting time as decided by Council
>
> ###
>
> Everything that does NOT use/inherit 10.0 will remain unaffected, and
> whoever responsible may have to take care of that some time before (in
> step 10) the main profile directory becomes EAPI=5. This means e.g.
> hardened, ulibc, prefix or bsd.
>
> Cheers,
> Andreas
--
Andreas K. Huettel
Gentoo Linux developer
dilfri...@gentoo.org
http://www.akhuettel.de/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] New, shiny EAPI=5 profiles: volunteer, procedure, preparations
On 18 January 2013 10:51, Michael Weber wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > On 01/12/2013 09:47 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: >> > > 10) add "13" to the selectable Versions in Bugzilla. > Not that anybody cares, but 10 and 10.1 are in there. > > Maybe we could drop these values (dropping the field might need a > change in the code) to reduce the number of selection a > newbie reporter is faced. Yeah this field is not used (properly) and it should be removed. Usually a bug in one profile, is also present in other profiles as well. -- Regards, Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2
Re: [gentoo-dev] New, shiny EAPI=5 profiles: volunteer, procedure, preparations
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 01/12/2013 09:47 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > 10) add "13" to the selectable Versions in Bugzilla. Not that anybody cares, but 10 and 10.1 are in there. Maybe we could drop these values (dropping the field might need a change in the code) to reduce the number of selection a newbie reporter is faced. - -- Michael Weber Gentoo Developer web: https://xmw.de/ mailto: Michael Weber -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iF4EAREIAAYFAlD5KUQACgkQknrdDGLu8JBmIwD/QGdNkWVAM5JsIDIXV9SGyNeC lkxm02p8qpbnCE+ZAuYA/3Gdf9xh6OMcCz5OAuTNnUcNrJ5JhtFMPBodqOC9lF0b =9c48 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] New, shiny EAPI=5 profiles: volunteer, procedure, preparations
Thanks for your work mate !
On 14/01/2013 21:24, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
[CC'ing this to core so noone can complain afterwards.]
Since 48h did not lead to any responses positive or negative, I'll start
implementing the procedure as given in the original e-mail (quoted below).
As also said below, each arch will get a mail before I touch their profile
tree and after I've finished.
Cheers, Andreas
Am Samstag, 12. Januar 2013, 21:47:18 schrieb Andreas K. Huettel:
Hi everyone,
since Council has approved the creation of a fresh set of EAPI=5 "13.0"
profiles, I would like to volunteer for creating them. The proposed
procedure is outlined below in detail, and I'd be happy for comments.
[If anything below deviates from Council decision, please tell me- not my
intention.]
One general question comes first, though: Right now, the releases/10.0
profile directory does the following things:
* mask too-old portage
* set eapi
* add USE=bzip2
Is there anything unrelated to EAPI=5 that absolutely must be added to the
new releases/13.0 directory in addition in your opinion? (Whether this is
the right place and was the right place in the beginning for USE=bzip2 is
another question.)
###
The procedure (all paths relative to profiles):
1) create directory eapi-5-files, with eapi (containing 5), skeletons for
package.stable.mask etc and a readme
2) copy releases/10.0 to releases/13.0, in releases/13.0:
* increase required portage version
* additionally inherit ../../eapi-5-files
* other changes as per question above?
3) for each arch in default/linux,
* announce on arch alias (to prevent overlapping commits)
* copy default/linux/${arch}/10.0 to default/linux/${arch}/13.0 and
* change inheritance in the new copy to inherit ../../../../releases/13.0
instead of ../../../../releases/10.0
* announce on arch alias (so future changes go into 13.0 tree)
[This describes the simple case. I realize that there are differences in
the directory structure, e.g. powerpc/ppc64/10.0, which is why this step
needs extra care.]
4) edit profiles.desc and copy all "10.0 lines" to "13.0 lines", with an
initial setting "dev" (if dev or stable before) or "exp" (if exp before)
This makes repoman check against the new profiles when using developer
profiles.
5) announce the state on the dev list, urging devs to update their symlink
manually and !test!
6) wait one / two weeks
7) in profiles.desc, mark all 13.0 profiles stable that were stable in
10.0, and remove the lines for the 10.0 profiles. This makes eselect
profile now only offer the new ones, and repoman test by default against
13.0 profiles.
8) mark all 10.0 profiles as deprecated by creating a "deprecated" file
(containing the replacement suggestion) in the directory. This makes
portage warn users to upgrade (suggesting a new profile for them), and
repoman ignore the 10.0 profiles.
9) long waiting time as decided by Council
###
Everything that does NOT use/inherit 10.0 will remain unaffected, and
whoever responsible may have to take care of that some time before (in
step 10) the main profile directory becomes EAPI=5. This means e.g.
hardened, ulibc, prefix or bsd.
Cheers,
Andreas
Re: [gentoo-dev] New, shiny EAPI=5 profiles: volunteer, procedure, preparations
[CC'ing this to core so noone can complain afterwards.]
Since 48h did not lead to any responses positive or negative, I'll start
implementing the procedure as given in the original e-mail (quoted below).
As also said below, each arch will get a mail before I touch their profile
tree and after I've finished.
Cheers, Andreas
Am Samstag, 12. Januar 2013, 21:47:18 schrieb Andreas K. Huettel:
> Hi everyone,
>
> since Council has approved the creation of a fresh set of EAPI=5 "13.0"
> profiles, I would like to volunteer for creating them. The proposed
> procedure is outlined below in detail, and I'd be happy for comments.
> [If anything below deviates from Council decision, please tell me- not my
> intention.]
>
> One general question comes first, though: Right now, the releases/10.0
> profile directory does the following things:
> * mask too-old portage
> * set eapi
> * add USE=bzip2
>
> Is there anything unrelated to EAPI=5 that absolutely must be added to the
> new releases/13.0 directory in addition in your opinion? (Whether this is
> the right place and was the right place in the beginning for USE=bzip2 is
> another question.)
>
> ###
>
> The procedure (all paths relative to profiles):
>
> 1) create directory eapi-5-files, with eapi (containing 5), skeletons for
> package.stable.mask etc and a readme
>
> 2) copy releases/10.0 to releases/13.0, in releases/13.0:
> * increase required portage version
> * additionally inherit ../../eapi-5-files
> * other changes as per question above?
>
> 3) for each arch in default/linux,
> * announce on arch alias (to prevent overlapping commits)
> * copy default/linux/${arch}/10.0 to default/linux/${arch}/13.0 and
> * change inheritance in the new copy to inherit ../../../../releases/13.0
> instead of ../../../../releases/10.0
> * announce on arch alias (so future changes go into 13.0 tree)
> [This describes the simple case. I realize that there are differences in
> the directory structure, e.g. powerpc/ppc64/10.0, which is why this step
> needs extra care.]
>
> 4) edit profiles.desc and copy all "10.0 lines" to "13.0 lines", with an
> initial setting "dev" (if dev or stable before) or "exp" (if exp before)
> This makes repoman check against the new profiles when using developer
> profiles.
>
> 5) announce the state on the dev list, urging devs to update their symlink
> manually and !test!
>
> 6) wait one / two weeks
>
> 7) in profiles.desc, mark all 13.0 profiles stable that were stable in
> 10.0, and remove the lines for the 10.0 profiles. This makes eselect
> profile now only offer the new ones, and repoman test by default against
> 13.0 profiles.
>
> 8) mark all 10.0 profiles as deprecated by creating a "deprecated" file
> (containing the replacement suggestion) in the directory. This makes
> portage warn users to upgrade (suggesting a new profile for them), and
> repoman ignore the 10.0 profiles.
>
> 9) long waiting time as decided by Council
>
> ###
>
> Everything that does NOT use/inherit 10.0 will remain unaffected, and
> whoever responsible may have to take care of that some time before (in
> step 10) the main profile directory becomes EAPI=5. This means e.g.
> hardened, ulibc, prefix or bsd.
>
> Cheers,
> Andreas
--
Andreas K. Huettel
Gentoo Linux developer
dilfri...@gentoo.org
http://www.akhuettel.de/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
[gentoo-dev] New, shiny EAPI=5 profiles: volunteer, procedure, preparations
Hi everyone,
since Council has approved the creation of a fresh set of EAPI=5 "13.0"
profiles, I would like to volunteer for creating them. The proposed procedure
is outlined below in detail, and I'd be happy for comments.
[If anything below deviates from Council decision, please tell me- not my
intention.]
One general question comes first, though: Right now, the releases/10.0 profile
directory does the following things:
* mask too-old portage
* set eapi
* add USE=bzip2
Is there anything unrelated to EAPI=5 that absolutely must be added to the new
releases/13.0 directory in addition in your opinion? (Whether this is the
right place and was the right place in the beginning for USE=bzip2 is another
question.)
###
The procedure (all paths relative to profiles):
1) create directory eapi-5-files, with eapi (containing 5), skeletons for
package.stable.mask etc and a readme
2) copy releases/10.0 to releases/13.0, in releases/13.0:
* increase required portage version
* additionally inherit ../../eapi-5-files
* other changes as per question above?
3) for each arch in default/linux,
* announce on arch alias (to prevent overlapping commits)
* copy default/linux/${arch}/10.0 to default/linux/${arch}/13.0 and
* change inheritance in the new copy to inherit ../../../../releases/13.0
instead of ../../../../releases/10.0
* announce on arch alias (so future changes go into 13.0 tree)
[This describes the simple case. I realize that there are differences in the
directory structure, e.g. powerpc/ppc64/10.0, which is why this step needs
extra care.]
4) edit profiles.desc and copy all "10.0 lines" to "13.0 lines", with an
initial setting "dev" (if dev or stable before) or "exp" (if exp before)
This makes repoman check against the new profiles when using developer
profiles.
5) announce the state on the dev list, urging devs to update their symlink
manually and !test!
6) wait one / two weeks
7) in profiles.desc, mark all 13.0 profiles stable that were stable in 10.0,
and remove the lines for the 10.0 profiles. This makes eselect profile now
only offer the new ones, and repoman test by default against 13.0 profiles.
8) mark all 10.0 profiles as deprecated by creating a "deprecated" file
(containing the replacement suggestion) in the directory. This makes portage
warn users to upgrade (suggesting a new profile for them), and repoman ignore
the 10.0 profiles.
9) long waiting time as decided by Council
###
Everything that does NOT use/inherit 10.0 will remain unaffected, and whoever
responsible may have to take care of that some time before (in step 10) the
main profile directory becomes EAPI=5. This means e.g. hardened, ulibc, prefix
or bsd.
Cheers,
Andreas
--
Andreas K. Huettel
Gentoo Linux developer
dilfri...@gentoo.org
http://www.akhuettel.de/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
