| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
nesl247
Veteran
Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 1614
Location: Florida
|
 Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 2:36 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| ciaranm wrote: | | nesl247 wrote: | | Will you support the folder structure for configuration (like portage-2.1) |
No. Our configuration structure is nothing like Portage's. |
Right, that's why I am asking if you will ever support it. I find it much easier to use than single files.
| ciaranm wrote: | | Quote: | | How do I disable all that annoying test every time I run paludis -i? |
Play with --log-level. Better yet, fix the errors. |
If it was understandable half the time it would be easier.
| ciaranm wrote: | | Quote: | | Why do I have to manually create /var/paludis/repositories/*/profiles/categories? - it works just fine as long even if it's blank |
Doesn't work just fine if it's blank. Paludis doesn't use overlays, it uses full multiple repository support. As such, each profile needs to provide its own full categories file. |
That's a good yet stupid point. I set the profile to be the gentoo one for every repo. Shouldn't have to do that.
| ciaranm wrote: | | Quote: | | Why do I have to specify x- in front of repository names when I manually sync them? |
Because your repositories don't have a repo_name file like they should. |
Well how can they if paludis doesn't create it.. You really expect everyone to just create these for all their repos. Paludis will never become widely used if it requires such user interaction.
| ciaranm wrote: | | Quote: | | Why isn't there a generic /var/paludis/distfiles directory instead of putting it in ${location}/distfiles by default? |
To avoid conflicts. If you want to take the risk, you're free to override it (and it'll be even easier to do so whenever someone gets around to making a repo defaults file). |
Conflicts how so? If it's a modified tarball it should have a different name than upstreams.
| ciaranm wrote: | | Quote: | | Will there ever be a paludis --ask or -a like in portage? - This is my major gripe |
The standard Paludis client will always be entirely non-interactive. Other clients, like gtkpaludis, can behave differently. |
Can't be non-interactive if I have to remove -p in order to actually move onwards.
| ciaranm wrote: | | Quote: | | Why are the files called package_unmask and package_mask when use.conf and keywords.conf don't have package_ in the name? |
To distinguish between package masks and use masks. |
Makes sense to a point.
| ciaranm wrote: | | Quote: | | How do I read the news as I don't see an option to, only to update it? |
eselect news |
Thanks |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ciaranm
Retired Dev
Joined: 19 Jul 2003
Posts: 1719
Location: In Hiding
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 2:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| nesl247 wrote: | | ciaranm wrote: | | nesl247 wrote: | | Will you support the folder structure for configuration (like portage-2.1) |
No. Our configuration structure is nothing like Portage's. |
Right, that's why I am asking if you will ever support it. I find it much easier to use than single files. |
You're asking why a chainsaw doesn't include a nail file like your nail clippers do.
| Quote: | | ciaranm wrote: | | Quote: | | How do I disable all that annoying test every time I run paludis -i? |
Play with --log-level. Better yet, fix the errors. |
If it was understandable half the time it would be easier. |
Oh, it's understandable.
| Quote: | | ciaranm wrote: | | Quote: | | Why do I have to manually create /var/paludis/repositories/*/profiles/categories? - it works just fine as long even if it's blank |
Doesn't work just fine if it's blank. Paludis doesn't use overlays, it uses full multiple repository support. As such, each profile needs to provide its own full categories file. |
That's a good yet stupid point. I set the profile to be the gentoo one for every repo. Shouldn't have to do that. |
Uh, you're confusing the profile with the profiles/ directory. They're not the same thing. Some profiles/ things are entirely independent of what you set for profiles =.
| Quote: | | ciaranm wrote: | | Quote: | | Why do I have to specify x- in front of repository names when I manually sync them? |
Because your repositories don't have a repo_name file like they should. |
Well how can they if paludis doesn't create it.. You really expect everyone to just create these for all their repos. Paludis will never become widely used if it requires such user interaction. |
Eh? No no no. Your repository provider is supposed to create these files. Not the end user.
| Quote: | | ciaranm wrote: | | Quote: | | Why isn't there a generic /var/paludis/distfiles directory instead of putting it in ${location}/distfiles by default? |
To avoid conflicts. If you want to take the risk, you're free to override it (and it'll be even easier to do so whenever someone gets around to making a repo defaults file). |
Conflicts how so? If it's a modified tarball it should have a different name than upstreams. |
And for generated tarballs, as are used in places where we have to repackage?
| Quote: | | ciaranm wrote: | | Quote: | | Will there ever be a paludis --ask or -a like in portage? - This is my major gripe |
The standard Paludis client will always be entirely non-interactive. Other clients, like gtkpaludis, can behave differently. |
Can't be non-interactive if I have to remove -p in order to actually move onwards. |
Huh? Sure it can. Your shell is interactive. The paludis client is not. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nesl247
Veteran
Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 1614
Location: Florida
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 3:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Thanks for answering my questions. You've just ruled out paludis ever becoming used by the masses in my opinion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ciaranm
Retired Dev
Joined: 19 Jul 2003
Posts: 1719
Location: In Hiding
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 3:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| nesl247 wrote: | | Thanks for answering my questions. You've just ruled out paludis ever becoming used by the masses in my opinion. |
Naah. You've just demonstrated why asking end users to design anything is a terrible idea. Be grateful that those of us who write the code are confident enough to ignore you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Q-collective
Veteran
Joined: 22 Mar 2004
Posts: 1923
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 3:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
ciaranm: you might be a great dev, but that attitude is just awfull.
Guess that's one of the reasons why we (read: user reps) exist  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nesl247
Veteran
Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 1614
Location: Florida
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 3:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ciaranm wrote: | | nesl247 wrote: | | Thanks for answering my questions. You've just ruled out paludis ever becoming used by the masses in my opinion. |
Naah. You've just demonstrated why asking end users to design anything is a terrible idea. Be grateful that those of us who write the code are confident enough to ignore you. |
I had meant that do you really think all the overlays are just going to add what is required to use paludis? Get real.
| Q-collective wrote: | ciaranm: you might be a great dev, but that attitude is just awfull.
Guess that's one of the reasons why we (read: user reps) exist |
And I'm glad it's not just me that thinks so. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ciaranm
Retired Dev
Joined: 19 Jul 2003
Posts: 1719
Location: In Hiding
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 3:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| nesl247 wrote: | | ciaranm wrote: | | nesl247 wrote: | | Thanks for answering my questions. You've just ruled out paludis ever becoming used by the masses in my opinion. |
Naah. You've just demonstrated why asking end users to design anything is a terrible idea. Be grateful that those of us who write the code are confident enough to ignore you. |
I had meant that do you really think all the overlays are just going to add what is required to use paludis? Get real. |
Er, yes, I do. Especially if those overlays intend to carry on working in the future... Bear in mind that it's a two minute job, and that Paludis is not the only thing requiring those files. The repo_name file, for example, will likely be required by Portage too if it ever gets a working GLEP 42 implementation, and a working GLEP 42 implementation is important for overlay maintainers.
| Quote: | | Q-collective wrote: | ciaranm: you might be a great dev, but that attitude is just awfull.
Guess that's one of the reasons why we (read: user reps) exist |
And I'm glad it's not just me that thinks so. |
*shrug* Would you fly in a plane designed by your grandmother? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kensai
Guru
Joined: 09 Mar 2004
Posts: 568
Location: Puerto Rico
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 3:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ciaranm wrote: | | *shrug* Would you fly in a plane designed by your grandmother? |
If she is an Engineer and worked all her life designing/making them, sure, I will. 
_________________
Gentoo: Gigabyte: nFORCE 2: nVIDIA GeForce 6600: AMD Athlon XP 3200+
Perspective of a Thinking Human Being |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cokehabit
Advocate
Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3302
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 11:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| nesl247 wrote: | | Thanks for answering my questions. You've just ruled out paludis ever becoming used by the masses in my opinion. |
well this may come across as nice to ciaranm but.... Paludis is not meant to be good for a user, it is meant to be good from a developers POV and ciaranm has never been quite able to grasp that if you write a package manager then users have to be able to use it. If he doesn't get used to thinking like a user then paludis will just end up being another funny tool for devs to play about with.
Maybe someone will greate a fork of it which will be great for users to use? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ciaranm
Retired Dev
Joined: 19 Jul 2003
Posts: 1719
Location: In Hiding
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 2:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cokehabit wrote: | | nesl247 wrote: | | Thanks for answering my questions. You've just ruled out paludis ever becoming used by the masses in my opinion. |
well this may come across as nice to ciaranm but.... Paludis is not meant to be good for a user, it is meant to be good from a developers POV and ciaranm has never been quite able to grasp that if you write a package manager then users have to be able to use it. If he doesn't get used to thinking like a user then paludis will just end up being another funny tool for devs to play about with. |
If thinking like a user means complaining that repositories will have to be changed in a way in which they'll have to be changed for Portage anyway, why would I want to think like a user? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vipernicus
Veteran
Joined: 17 Jan 2005
Posts: 1462
Location: Your College IT Dept.
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 6:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think what he was complaining about was:
Portage supports:
/etc/portage/package.unmask/xorg-x11
/etc/portage/package.unmask/gnome
Paludis supports:
/etc/paludis/package_unmask.conf
His question is, will Paludis ever support something like:
/etc/paludis/package_unmask/xorg-x11.conf
/etc/paludis/package_unmask/gnome.conf
_________________
Viper-Sources Maintainer || nesl247 Projects || vipernicus.org blog |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ciaranm
Retired Dev
Joined: 19 Jul 2003
Posts: 1719
Location: In Hiding
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 6:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| vipernicus wrote: | His question is, will Paludis ever support something like:
/etc/paludis/package_unmask/xorg-x11.conf
/etc/paludis/package_unmask/gnome.conf |
It'd be very easy to add /etc/paludis/package_unmask.conf.d/blah, if anyone really thinks that such a feature is useful. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
boniek
Guru
Joined: 26 Mar 2005
Posts: 373
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 6:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Any idea where can I find some sort of a roadmap for Paludis (e.g. when there will be full rev-deps support , 100% compatibility with ebuilds in official tree, and others)?
Will it be supported (after reaching certain level of maturity) as an alternative to Portage by Gentoo?
Oh and one more thing - why the name Paludis?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ciaranm
Retired Dev
Joined: 19 Jul 2003
Posts: 1719
Location: In Hiding
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 6:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| boniek wrote: | | Any idea where can I find some sort of a roadmap for Paludis (e.g. when there will be full rev-deps support , 100% compatibility with ebuilds in official tree, and others)? |
In my brain. It changes a lot, and can be influenced by patches and bribes.
| Quote: | | Will it be supported (after reaching certain level of maturity) as an alternative to Portage by Gentoo? |
We're working (very slowly) upon putting together a series of standards dictating how package managers should work. Once these're done, any package manager meeting this specification will officially be supported.
| Quote: | | Oh and one more thing - why the name Paludis? |
Obscure in-joke. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paapaa
l33t
Joined: 14 Aug 2005
Posts: 955
Location: Finland
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 8:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ciaranm, have you ever considered implementing some smart ordering of package compiles? Basically I mean situations when one updates a toolchain component and has to rebuild the system N+1 times. I don't think user should now what packages and in which order he has to recompile if he updates a toolchain (or any other) package. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ciaranm
Retired Dev
Joined: 19 Jul 2003
Posts: 1719
Location: In Hiding
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 8:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Paapaa wrote: | | ciaranm, have you ever considered implementing some smart ordering of package compiles? Basically I mean situations when one updates a toolchain component and has to rebuild the system N+1 times. I don't think user should now what packages and in which order he has to recompile if he updates a toolchain (or any other) package. |
That's something that needs ebuild changes, so it's not something that's a priority for Paludis. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
devsk
Advocate
Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 2632
Location: Bay Area, CA
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 8:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | ciaranm, have you ever considered implementing some smart ordering of package compiles? Basically I mean situations when one updates a toolchain component and has to rebuild the system N+1 times. I don't think user should now what packages and in which order he has to recompile if he updates a toolchain (or any other) package. |
if paludis takes care of circular deps, there should be no need for *multiple* 'emerge -e system/world' after toolchain update. If portage orders every 'n' sized cycle present in the digraph linearly into a 2*n-1 chain and assign them appropriate merge slots, emerge -e system will probably take 125% time of current 'emerge -e system' but it won't be required to run again (which means 200% time).
I don't think you wanna bypass a minimum of one round of 'emerge -e system' after toolchain update.
If the package is not toolchain pkg, then cut&paste ciaranm's comment here... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vipernicus
Veteran
Joined: 17 Jan 2005
Posts: 1462
Location: Your College IT Dept.
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 10:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ciaranm wrote: | | vipernicus wrote: | His question is, will Paludis ever support something like:
/etc/paludis/package_unmask/xorg-x11.conf
/etc/paludis/package_unmask/gnome.conf |
It'd be very easy to add /etc/paludis/package_unmask.conf.d/blah, if anyone really thinks that such a feature is useful. |
I really think that such a feature is useful.
_________________
Viper-Sources Maintainer || nesl247 Projects || vipernicus.org blog |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ciaranm
Retired Dev
Joined: 19 Jul 2003
Posts: 1719
Location: In Hiding
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 10:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| vipernicus wrote: | | ciaranm wrote: | | It'd be very easy to add /etc/paludis/package_unmask.conf.d/blah, if anyone really thinks that such a feature is useful. |
I really think that such a feature is useful. |
Then you should make a patch. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pilla
Administrator
Joined: 07 Aug 2002
Posts: 7184
Location: Pelotas, BR
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 18, 2006 12:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Q-collective wrote: | ciaranm: you might be a great dev, but that attitude is just awfull.
Guess that's one of the reasons why we (read: user reps) exist |
I don´t think that user reps have anything to do with ciaranm, as he isn´t a Gentoo developer anymore.
_________________
"I'm just very selective about the reality I choose to accept." -- Calvin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cokehabit
Advocate
Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3302
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 18, 2006 5:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ciaranm wrote: | | Quote: | | Oh and one more thing - why the name Paludis? |
Obscure in-joke. |
... go on |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mark_alec
Bodhisattva
Joined: 11 Sep 2004
Posts: 6066
Location: Melbourne, Australia
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 18, 2006 7:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| cokehabit wrote: | | ciaranm wrote: | | Quote: | | Oh and one more thing - why the name Paludis? |
Obscure in-joke. |
... go on |
I have heard that paludis stands for: Portage - A Loser Uses Dis (this).
_________________
www.gentoo.org.au || #gentoo-au |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sachankara
l33t
Joined: 11 Jun 2004
Posts: 696
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mark_alec wrote: | | cokehabit wrote: | | ciaranm wrote: | | Quote: | | Oh and one more thing - why the name Paludis? |
Obscure in-joke. |
... go on |
I have heard that paludis stands for: Portage - A Loser Uses Dis (this). |
All laughs directed at themselves I guess. They can't even spell correctly. 
_________________
Gentoo Hardened Linux 2.6.21 + svorak (Swedish dvorak) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ciaranm
Retired Dev
Joined: 19 Jul 2003
Posts: 1719
Location: In Hiding
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Pfff. Keep guessing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bobobo
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 122
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| When i first read it, i read 'paludism' accidental coincidence i guess ~ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Off the Wall
