Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo git workflows and the stabilization/keywording process

2014-09-19 Thread Tobias Klausmann
Hi! On Thu, 18 Sep 2014, Rich Freeman wrote: On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 1:53 PM, Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote: On Thu, 18 Sep 2014, Tobias Klausmann wrote: However, one aspect of how ebuilds are written these days will cause a non-trivial amount of merge commits that are not

Re: [gentoo-scm] Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo git workflows and the stabilization/keywording process

2014-09-19 Thread Kent Fredric
On 19 September 2014 06:51, Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote: Git even allows the use of tools like meld to resolve conflicts, besides the usual fill-the-file-with-diffs-to-cleanup approach. I'd personally discourage any kind of collision resolution in the merge itself. Mostly because

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo git workflows and the stabilization/keywording process

2014-09-19 Thread Tom Wijsman
On Thu, 18 Sep 2014 19:39:08 +0200 Tobias Klausmann klaus...@gentoo.org wrote: AIUI, we try to avoid merge conflicts, unless the merge is a meaningful integration of divergent processes. However, one aspect of how ebuilds are written these days will cause a non-trivial amount of merge

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo git workflows and the stabilization/keywording process

2014-09-19 Thread Tobias Klausmann
Hi! On Fri, 19 Sep 2014, Tom Wijsman wrote: On Thu, 18 Sep 2014 19:39:08 +0200 Tobias Klausmann klaus...@gentoo.org wrote: AIUI, we try to avoid merge conflicts, unless the merge is a meaningful integration of divergent processes. However, one aspect of how ebuilds are written these

[gentoo-dev] Unifying the PostgreSQL Ebuilds

2014-09-19 Thread Aaron W. Swenson
I've been working on unifying the PostgreSQL ebuilds for a while now. Besides just being cleaner and taking a bit less time to compile, it will inherently resolve a couple issues that are difficult to workaround, such as cross compilation [1] and CFLAGS changes [2]. I'm including a list of

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo git workflows and the stabilization/keywording process

2014-09-19 Thread hasufell
Tobias Klausmann: If this should really turn out to be a problem, then we could also: 4) Replace git's default merge driver by our own one that is better suited for ebuilds. This can be done per repository via .git/config and .gitattributes. Certainly that would be even more helpful!

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo git workflows and the stabilization/keywording process

2014-09-19 Thread Rich Freeman
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 10:25 AM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote: That is pretty easy and takes you ~20s for a keyword merge. What's the problem? Agree. Also, there was a comment that git pull is much slower than cvs. While it is true that git does refresh the whole tree all the time,

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo git workflows and the stabilization/keywording process

2014-09-19 Thread Ian Stakenvicius
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 19/09/14 10:48 AM, Rich Freeman wrote: On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 10:25 AM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote: That is pretty easy and takes you ~20s for a keyword merge. What's the problem? Agree. Also, there was a comment that git

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo git workflows and the stabilization/keywording process

2014-09-19 Thread Ian Stakenvicius
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 19/09/14 11:10 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: I don't think there's any valid debate on whether git is more efficient than cvs on fetching tree-wide updates :) erm, that was worded wrong, let me try again: I don't think there's any valid

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo git workflows and the stabilization/keywording process

2014-09-19 Thread hasufell
Ian Stakenvicius: Git on the other hand will update the entire tree and there's no way around that, right? Yeah, people have to understand that we cannot map the cvs workflow 1:1 to git. That's for a reason and that little inconvenience it causes is pretty minor compared to the breakage CVS

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo git workflows and the stabilization/keywording process

2014-09-19 Thread Ulrich Mueller
On Fri, 19 Sep 2014, hasufell wrote: There is no reason to roll back commits or do merge commits for the keywords conflict use case. So I don't see what else needs discussion here, except the proposal from ulm. About an optimised merge driver for ebuilds? Please don't see this as a blocker

[gentoo-dev] Re: My masterplan for git migration (+ looking for infra to test it)

2014-09-19 Thread Martin Vaeth
Diamond diam...@hi-net.ru wrote: There's no git cp command. git mv is just git rm + git add. I think there is a misunderstanding about how git works. If you are used to e.g. svn (I suppose with CVS it is similar) then it makes an important difference whether you use svn cp A B or /bin/cp A B,

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: kde5 and kde5-functions eclass

2014-09-19 Thread Davide Pesavento
kde5.eclass case ${KDE_TEST} in false) ;; *) IUSE+= test DEPEND+= test? ( dev-qt/qttest:5 ) No =${QT_MINIMAL} in this dep? else unpack ${A} I think you can use `default` if ! in_iuse examples || ! use examples ; then if ! use_if_iuse examples ; then if ! in_iuse test || ! use test

[gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] emerge: --autounmask-write if --ask (bug 481578)

2014-09-19 Thread Alexander Berntsen
From: Alexander Berntsen alexan...@plaimi.net Signed-off-by: Alexander Berntsen berna...@gentoo.org --- Use 'is' instead of '==', as recommended by Zac. man/emerge.1| 3 ++- pym/_emerge/depgraph.py | 7 +-- 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git

[gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] _quickpkg_dblink: fix bug #523152

2014-09-19 Thread Zac Medico
This fixes the unmerge-backup and downgrade-backup features to be compatible with the new setup.py quickpkg install location, while preserving compatibility for running from a source tree (for unit tests or development purposes). If not running from a source tree, then the PATH variable is used to

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] _quickpkg_dblink: fix bug #523152

2014-09-19 Thread Brian Dolbec
On Fri, 19 Sep 2014 16:35:30 -0700 Zac Medico zmed...@gentoo.org wrote: This fixes the unmerge-backup and downgrade-backup features to be compatible with the new setup.py quickpkg install location, while preserving compatibility for running from a source tree (for unit tests or development