Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Splitting desktop profile to KDE and GNOME
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 12:07:08PM -0400, Richard Freeman wrote: R??mi Cardona wrote: Le 26/10/2009 22:58, Richard Freeman a ??crit : Gentoo is about choice. No it isn't. Gentoo is about empowering users, giving them the ability and tools to _change_ the distro to _their_ needs. Gentoo does _not_ cater to all the possible needs. This is somewhat off-topic, but it irks me every time I see/hear it, so there. Well, I'm not sure I see any contradiction. When people say that gentoo is about choice, it means that we should give the end-user flexibility whenever it is feasible. Of course that doesn't mean that there should be a lunar-lander-in-a-box use flag. However, if KDE 4.2 includes a lunar lander module we should in fact add such a flag for the benefit of those of us who don't own space programs. Agreed. However, I think the discussion is around whether we should enable the lunar-lander-in-a-box use flag by default and where it should be enabled by us if we do enable it. Since profiles override IUSE defaults, if we enable the flag in the profiles, this means that it will be enabled for all packages that have the use flag, regardless of whether they are KDE related, unless the user disables the flag in make.conf or package.use. On the other hand, if we enable it with IUSE defaults at the package level, it lets the user decide whether or not they want it to be enabled for their entire system by editing make.conf. Imho the profiles should enable only use flags that are necessary for running that profile and allow users and package maintainers to control the rest. -- William Hubbs gentoo accessibility team lead willi...@gentoo.org pgpbTKeJIGaJC.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Splitting desktop profile to KDE and GNOME
William Hubbs schrieb: On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 12:07:08PM -0400, Richard Freeman wrote: R??mi Cardona wrote: Le 26/10/2009 22:58, Richard Freeman a ??crit : Gentoo is about choice. No it isn't. Gentoo is about empowering users, giving them the ability and tools to _change_ the distro to _their_ needs. Gentoo does _not_ cater to all the possible needs. This is somewhat off-topic, but it irks me every time I see/hear it, so there. Well, I'm not sure I see any contradiction. When people say that gentoo is about choice, it means that we should give the end-user flexibility whenever it is feasible. Of course that doesn't mean that there should be a lunar-lander-in-a-box use flag. However, if KDE 4.2 includes a lunar lander module we should in fact add such a flag for the benefit of those of us who don't own space programs. Agreed. However, I think the discussion is around whether we should enable the lunar-lander-in-a-box use flag by default and where it should be enabled by us if we do enable it. Since profiles override IUSE defaults, if we enable the flag in the profiles, this means that it will be enabled for all packages that have the use flag, regardless of whether they are KDE related, unless the user disables the flag in make.conf or package.use. On the other hand, if we enable it with IUSE defaults at the package level, it lets the user decide whether or not they want it to be enabled for their entire system by editing make.conf. Are you sure about this part? Afaik IUSE defaults overrides make.conf, you will have to explicitly add an entry to package.use for every package, where it is enabled per IUSE default. -- Thomas Sachau Gentoo Linux Developer signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Splitting desktop profile to KDE and GNOME
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 06:43:52PM +0100, Thomas Sachau wrote: William Hubbs schrieb: On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 12:07:08PM -0400, Richard Freeman wrote: R??mi Cardona wrote: Le 26/10/2009 22:58, Richard Freeman a ??crit : Gentoo is about choice. No it isn't. Gentoo is about empowering users, giving them the ability and tools to _change_ the distro to _their_ needs. Gentoo does _not_ cater to all the possible needs. This is somewhat off-topic, but it irks me every time I see/hear it, so there. Well, I'm not sure I see any contradiction. When people say that gentoo is about choice, it means that we should give the end-user flexibility whenever it is feasible. Of course that doesn't mean that there should be a lunar-lander-in-a-box use flag. However, if KDE 4.2 includes a lunar lander module we should in fact add such a flag for the benefit of those of us who don't own space programs. Agreed. However, I think the discussion is around whether we should enable the lunar-lander-in-a-box use flag by default and where it should be enabled by us if we do enable it. Since profiles override IUSE defaults, if we enable the flag in the profiles, this means that it will be enabled for all packages that have the use flag, regardless of whether they are KDE related, unless the user disables the flag in make.conf or package.use. On the other hand, if we enable it with IUSE defaults at the package level, it lets the user decide whether or not they want it to be enabled for their entire system by editing make.conf. Are you sure about this part? Afaik IUSE defaults overrides make.conf, you will have to explicitly add an entry to package.use for every package, where it is enabled per IUSE default. I just tested this, and make.conf overrides iuse defaults. To verify this for yourself, pick a package with an iuse default turning on a flag, then turn off the flag in make.conf and check what would happen if you emerged the package. package.use overrides for a single package, but make.conf overrides for all of your system. -- William Hubbs gentoo accessibility team lead willi...@gentoo.org pgpKZ1xjYOJSj.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Splitting desktop profile to KDE and GNOME
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 11:29 PM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: I just tested this, and make.conf overrides iuse defaults. To verify this for yourself, pick a package with an iuse default turning on a flag, then turn off the flag in make.conf and check what would happen if you emerged the package. package.use overrides for a single package, but make.conf overrides for all of your system. This behaviour is controlled by the variable USE_ORDER. make.globals sets this to: USE_ORDER=env:pkg:conf:defaults:pkginternal:env.d -- ~Nirbheek Chauhan Gentoo GNOME+Mozilla Team
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Splitting desktop profile to KDE and GNOME
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 11:37:38PM +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 11:29 PM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: I just tested this, and make.conf overrides iuse defaults. ??To verify this for yourself, pick a package with an iuse default turning on a flag, then turn off the flag in make.conf and check what would happen if you emerged the package. package.use overrides for a single package, but make.conf overrides for all of your system. This behaviour is controlled by the variable USE_ORDER. make.globals sets this to: USE_ORDER=env:pkg:conf:defaults:pkginternal:env.d That is correct, and the documentation (man make.conf) gives a very strong warning about changing this setting: Do not modify this value unless you are a developer and you know what you are doing. If you change this and something breaks, we will not help you fix it. I can't find the bug right now, but at one point I asked in a bug about the possibility of switching the order of defaults and pkginternal on the grounds that if a maintainer wants to disable a use flag for a package that is enabled in the profile they can't because the profile overrides the iuse defaults. It was closed as wontfix because it has been agreed that the profile's use flag settings should have a higher priority than the ebuild's. I'm cool with that, but that is also why I think the use flags the profiles enable should be the bare essentials for using that profile. -- William Hubbs gentoo accessibility team lead willi...@gentoo.org pgpJcdNpQuTLK.pgp Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Splitting desktop profile to KDE and GNOME
Maciej Mrozowski posted on Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:40:17 +0100 as excerpted: And I fail to see *any* point in forcing users to learn Gentoo internals (sic! like USE flags). What else? Ebuild syntax so that they're able to get to know what particular global USE flag is responsible for, when someone forgot (or decided not to) describe it in metadata.xml even when semantics is different? Maybe I sound too harsh here, but that's because I'm not ideologist - I'm practical man. Actually, yes. Gentoo has never been a hand-holding distribution. We try to provide documentation and reasonable defaults for any apps the user chooses to install, and let the user configure what they will. For some time I've wondered about all those profiles. IMO, for pure/ normal USE flag issues, we don't need profiles. Profiles are for things such as setting the arch, masking stuff that won't run on that arch, doing the necessary to make multilib work as appropriate, setting up a basic system set of packages, etc. After that, it's upto[1] the user. USE flags are documented in the handbook, and a major defining part of what makes Gentoo, Gentoo. If they can't even manage to learn USE flag basics, honestly, they'd be better off with a different distribution, probably something that does a bit more hand-holding, like Ubuntu, because they're going thru a whole lot of additional hassle compiling stuff, etc, for very little payoff in practical terms, because they simply aren't using Gentoo as it was designed to be used. So IMO, few if any USE flags should be set in the profiles. That is, or should be, upto the user to decide. In general, if a USE flag is not set in a user's make.conf, it shouldn't be on, with few exceptions definitely not at the system level, and with some exceptions, not at the individual ebuild/pkg level either. --- [1] Upto: Yeah, I know, but Wictionary already defines it as a common misspelling, so make it even more common and eventually it'll no longer be a misspelling but considered normal and correct usage, just as into is no longer a misspelling but normal and correct usage. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master. Richard Stallman
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Splitting desktop profile to KDE and GNOME
Duncan wrote: Actually, yes. Gentoo has never been a hand-holding distribution. We try to provide documentation and reasonable defaults for any apps the user chooses to install, and let the user configure what they will. Gentoo is about choice. Well, except for the choice to not have to choose... I don't see why having some nice polished sets of use flags is a bad thing. Personally, I find it a pain when I've emerged half of my system only to find out I left out some critical use flag (my use flags take up several lines now). Sure, leave users a choice, but there is no harm in giving them some pointers. Gentoo should be fully usable in a USE= state, but that doesn't mean that we need to make users start out from this point.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Splitting desktop profile to KDE and GNOME
Le 26/10/2009 22:58, Richard Freeman a écrit : Gentoo is about choice. No it isn't. Gentoo is about empowering users, giving them the ability and tools to _change_ the distro to _their_ needs. Gentoo does _not_ cater to all the possible needs. This is somewhat off-topic, but it irks me every time I see/hear it, so there. Cheers, Rémi
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Splitting desktop profile to KDE and GNOME
When it all comes down, I just fail to see how the handbook doesn't provide the pointers. I've always been about getting my system up and running, and then learn whatever needs learning, this means that whilst I didn't have more than a basic knowledge and understanding of useflags when installing, that knowledge has grown due to necessity of using gentoo to it's full potential. I think setting up useflags should be left to the user. A system can be recompiled should the need arise. The reason I chose gentoo as my distribution was that, it seemed to me that it gives you a basic knowledge of the system and then encourages to gain and apply further knowledge according to need. But again, the handbook gives all the necessary pointers, albeit there can occur conflicts that are outside of the range of the handbook, but that's why the forums and the irc channels are there :-) On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 22:58:57 +0100, Richard Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote: I don't see why having some nice polished sets of use flags is a bad thing. Personally, I find it a pain when I've emerged half of my system only to find out I left out some critical use flag (my use flags take up several lines now). Sure, leave users a choice, but there is no harm in giving them some pointers. Gentoo should be fully usable in a USE= state, but that doesn't mean that we need to make users start out from this point. -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
