| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Hu
Moderator
Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 21631
|
 Posted: Sun Jun 13, 2021 11:04 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| mike155 wrote: | | asturm wrote: | | The whole discussion is moot since the quoted paragraph is explicitly talking about p.provided support in profiles. As long as your PMS compliant package manager of choice is supporting a p.provided directory below /etc/portage you are fine, EAPI-7 is completely irrelevant there. But of course, the quoted paragraph is served from a particular URI, hence bashing ensues... |
I would like to understand this, but I can't. What am I missing? |
Having re-read the quote, and in conjunction with asturm's recent comments, I think the change is that Portage will no longer allow package.provided to be used in the shared profiles that we all get from the Gentoo Portage tree / from overlay trees. Portage will continue to recognize the special file /etc/portage/profile/package.provided, which is the only provided-related file that end users should be touching. (As with all other files in the main tree, patching a provided file in the main tree will just get it overwritten in your next sync.) This makes the change much less interesting to most of us, since the only people who can be inconvenienced by its loss (tree maintainers) are also exactly the people who have the permissions to create dummy/virtual packages in the tree, which can satisfy the resolver without the need for package.provided.
It certainly confuses things that a change that is not tied to EAPI=7 at the individual ebuild level showed up in a post about what EAPI=7 changes. I suspect most people don't think about how profiles also have an eapi level. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mike155
Advocate
Joined: 17 Sep 2010
Posts: 4438
Location: Frankfurt, Germany
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 14, 2021 2:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks, Hu! That makes sense!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sam_
Developer
Joined: 14 Aug 2020
Posts: 1678
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2021 6:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Hu wrote: | | mike155 wrote: | | asturm wrote: | | The whole discussion is moot since the quoted paragraph is explicitly talking about p.provided support in profiles. As long as your PMS compliant package manager of choice is supporting a p.provided directory below /etc/portage you are fine, EAPI-7 is completely irrelevant there. But of course, the quoted paragraph is served from a particular URI, hence bashing ensues... |
I would like to understand this, but I can't. What am I missing? |
Having re-read the quote, and in conjunction with asturm's recent comments, I think the change is that Portage will no longer allow package.provided to be used in the shared profiles that we all get from the Gentoo Portage tree / from overlay trees. Portage will continue to recognize the special file /etc/portage/profile/package.provided, which is the only provided-related file that end users should be touching. (As with all other files in the main tree, patching a provided file in the main tree will just get it overwritten in your next sync.) This makes the change much less interesting to most of us, since the only people who can be inconvenienced by its loss (tree maintainers) are also exactly the people who have the permissions to create dummy/virtual packages in the tree, which can satisfy the resolver without the need for package.provided.
It certainly confuses things that a change that is not tied to EAPI=7 at the individual ebuild level showed up in a post about what EAPI=7 changes. I suspect most people don't think about how profiles also have an eapi level. |
Just to confirm: this matches my understanding (as does asturm's comment). Note that mgorny's blog posts are a personal piece of work. It's not like they're the official source of documentation on what an EAPI is (that is, and always has been, the PMS), and to a lesser extent given it's not binding, the devmanual.
I have seen this misunderstanding before and thought it'd be a good idea to clear it up. The "ultimate guide to..." posts by mgorny are not the canonical source of truth of an EAPI (and why would they be?). This is like a politician writing a book -- it's not like that replaces the law?
As a general comment on the thread: It's also okay to just ask a question about whether something really means what you think if the implication seems crazy to you, rather than jumping to insults. I will always make an effort to respond to technical questions like this, provided they're polite of course, if I'm directed to them or anything like that. As developers, we love Gentoo too, and we don't spend hours each day on it just to wreck it.
I am happy to make a pull request or contribute a patch to clarify the phrasing of either of the official documents if anybody has any suggestions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naib
Watchman
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 6051
Location: Removed by Neddy
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2021 8:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sam_ wrote: |
Just to confirm: this matches my understanding (as does asturm's comment). Note that mgorny's blog posts are a personal piece of work. It's not like they're the official source of documentation on what an EAPI is (that is, and always has been, the PMS), and to a lesser extent given it's not binding, the devmanual.
|
Except that is a bit disingenuous to basically dismiss inaccuracies like this simply because they are someones personal blog post
1) mgormy is a gentoo dev
2) mgormy is a council representative
3) it is directly linked from gentoo's namespace
And thus a significant amount of responsibility has to be taken
_________________
| Quote: | | Removed by Chiitoo |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hu
Moderator
Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 21631
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2021 8:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| It is prominently linked, but the point that triggered the most derision isn't actually inaccurate. It's just confusing because of the different places that package.provided was used. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sam_
Developer
Joined: 14 Aug 2020
Posts: 1678
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2021 8:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Naib wrote: | | sam_ wrote: |
Just to confirm: this matches my understanding (as does asturm's comment). Note that mgorny's blog posts are a personal piece of work. It's not like they're the official source of documentation on what an EAPI is (that is, and always has been, the PMS), and to a lesser extent given it's not binding, the devmanual.
|
Except that is a bit disingenuous to basically dismiss inaccuracies like this simply because they are someones personal blog post
1) mgormy is a gentoo dev
2) mgormy is a council representative
3) it is directly linked from gentoo's namespace
And thus a significant amount of responsibility has to be taken |
But it's his blog, like you said? It's not linked from the "Gentoo namespace" other than on planet.gentoo.org which is a syndicator. If someone wants to ask him to clarify it, he's welcome to, but I honestly think this was a phrasing issue? It's not as if this is deliberately confusingly phrased.
I don't think I'm being disingenuous, I'm just explaining what is official, what isn't, and what's a personal effort to explain EAPIs.
Technical writing is a pain sometimes and it's not easy to realise when you have/haven't left out some important clarification. I'm not sure anybody has actually emailed him or messaged him asking him to change the phrasing. I'm happy to ask him to tweak the phrasing to make clear this is unrelated to /etc/portage?
(This is completely unrelated to whether people disagree with him on other issues, I'm just trying to clarify what is/isn't documentation.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naib
Watchman
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 6051
Location: Removed by Neddy
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2021 9:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sam_ wrote: | | Naib wrote: | | sam_ wrote: |
Just to confirm: this matches my understanding (as does asturm's comment). Note that mgorny's blog posts are a personal piece of work. It's not like they're the official source of documentation on what an EAPI is (that is, and always has been, the PMS), and to a lesser extent given it's not binding, the devmanual.
|
Except that is a bit disingenuous to basically dismiss inaccuracies like this simply because they are someones personal blog post
1) mgormy is a gentoo dev
2) mgormy is a council representative
3) it is directly linked from gentoo's namespace
And thus a significant amount of responsibility has to be taken |
But it's his blog, like you said? It's not linked from the "Gentoo namespace" other than on planet.gentoo.org which is a syndicator. If someone wants to ask him to clarify it, he's welcome to, but I honestly think this was a phrasing issue? It's not as if this is deliberately confusingly phrased.
I don't think I'm being disingenuous, I'm just explaining what is official, what isn't, and what's a personal effort to explain EAPIs.
Technical writing is a pain sometimes and it's not easy to realise when you have/haven't left out some important clarification. I'm not sure anybody has actually emailed him or messaged him asking him to change the phrasing. I'm happy to ask him to tweak the phrasing to make clear this is unrelated to /etc/portage?
(This is completely unrelated to whether people disagree with him on other issues, I'm just trying to clarify what is/isn't documentation.) |
and yet the URL I posted is https://blogs.gentoo.org now if that isn't gentoo's namespace feel free to correct me, otherwise have the inaccurate information removed, its quite simple
_________________
| Quote: | | Removed by Chiitoo |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sam_
Developer
Joined: 14 Aug 2020
Posts: 1678
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2021 9:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Naib wrote: | | sam_ wrote: | | Naib wrote: | | sam_ wrote: |
Just to confirm: this matches my understanding (as does asturm's comment). Note that mgorny's blog posts are a personal piece of work. It's not like they're the official source of documentation on what an EAPI is (that is, and always has been, the PMS), and to a lesser extent given it's not binding, the devmanual.
|
Except that is a bit disingenuous to basically dismiss inaccuracies like this simply because they are someones personal blog post
1) mgormy is a gentoo dev
2) mgormy is a council representative
3) it is directly linked from gentoo's namespace
And thus a significant amount of responsibility has to be taken |
But it's his blog, like you said? It's not linked from the "Gentoo namespace" other than on planet.gentoo.org which is a syndicator. If someone wants to ask him to clarify it, he's welcome to, but I honestly think this was a phrasing issue? It's not as if this is deliberately confusingly phrased.
I don't think I'm being disingenuous, I'm just explaining what is official, what isn't, and what's a personal effort to explain EAPIs.
Technical writing is a pain sometimes and it's not easy to realise when you have/haven't left out some important clarification. I'm not sure anybody has actually emailed him or messaged him asking him to change the phrasing. I'm happy to ask him to tweak the phrasing to make clear this is unrelated to /etc/portage?
(This is completely unrelated to whether people disagree with him on other issues, I'm just trying to clarify what is/isn't documentation.) |
and yet the URL I posted is https://blogs.gentoo.org now if that isn't gentoo's namespace feel free to correct me, otherwise have the inaccurate information removed, its quite simple |
But they're people's blogs? I guess it is the namespace, but it's not the same as linking to it on the homepage or something. People can write anything on their blogs.
I'm still not sure if it's inaccurate or just a bit misleading/confusing. It's a technical bit of writing about profiles and Portage's /etc/portage/profile kind of operates in a weird zone where it's not strictly an EAPI-compliant profile. But I'm still happy to pass on any phrasing if you have some suggestions, or I can try think of some myself failing that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naib
Watchman
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 6051
Location: Removed by Neddy
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2021 9:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sam_ wrote: | | Naib wrote: | | sam_ wrote: |
Just to confirm: this matches my understanding (as does asturm's comment). Note that mgorny's blog posts are a personal piece of work. It's not like they're the official source of documentation on what an EAPI is (that is, and always has been, the PMS), and to a lesser extent given it's not binding, the devmanual.
|
Except that is a bit disingenuous to basically dismiss inaccuracies like this simply because they are someones personal blog post
1) mgormy is a gentoo dev
2) mgormy is a council representative
3) it is directly linked from gentoo's namespace
And thus a significant amount of responsibility has to be taken |
But it's his blog, like you said? It's not linked from the "Gentoo namespace" other than on planet.gentoo.org which is a syndicator. If someone wants to ask him to clarify it, he's welcome to, but I honestly think this was a phrasing issue? It's not as if this is deliberately confusingly phrased.
I don't think I'm being disingenuous, I'm just explaining what is official, what isn't, and what's a personal effort to explain EAPIs.
Technical writing is a pain sometimes and it's not easy to realise when you have/haven't left out some important clarification. I'm not sure anybody has actually emailed him or messaged him asking him to change the phrasing. I'm happy to ask him to tweak the phrasing to make clear this is unrelated to /etc/portage?
(This is completely unrelated to whether people disagree with him on other issues, I'm just trying to clarify what is/isn't documentation.) |
and yet the URL I posted is https://blogs.gentoo.org now if that isn't gentoo's namespace feel free to correct me, otherwise have the inaccurate information removed, its quite simple.
Already people from the "community" have been referring to it as some canonical reference, due to where it has come from and thus it is doing more harm than good to gentoo users and its community
_________________
| Quote: | | Removed by Chiitoo |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
asturm
Developer
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 8936
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 06, 2021 7:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| OTW users are the main source of 'inaccurate information' as far as this thread is concerned. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zucca
Moderator
Joined: 14 Jun 2007
Posts: 3345
Location: Rasi, Finland
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 06, 2021 9:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Please, let's keep provoking others out of this thread.
This has been an interesting thread and let's keep it that way.
_________________
..: Zucca :..
Gentoo IRC channels reside on Libera.Chat.
--
| Quote: | | I am NaN! I am a man! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flysideways
Guru
Joined: 29 Jan 2005
Posts: 437
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 06, 2021 1:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
One issue that will always be labor intensive is maintaining current and correct documentation. You know the type, you can follow it to the letter and it consistently produces a working, desired result.
The discussion of what is on the Gentoo namespace is relevant. If there is an official statement anywhere describing the purpose and reliability of the various sections of the namespace, I am not aware of it. It should be brutally obvious as to what is Official Policy, and that should be maintained so as to be always current and correct. Handbooks should also be maintained so as to be always current and correct. If one is in the position to dictate official policy, they also have the responsibility to ensure that the statements of current official policy and the Handbooks are correctly maintained.
Choice, for most of us we use Gentoo because we can build systems that are to our liking. If anyone that is endowed with the ability to steer the official direction and policy of Gentoo does not understand that to the core of their being, we are all disserved. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flysideways
Guru
Joined: 29 Jan 2005
Posts: 437
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flysideways
Guru
Joined: 29 Jan 2005
Posts: 437
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 06, 2021 1:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
out
Last edited by flysideways on Tue Jul 06, 2021 6:41 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zucca
Moderator
Joined: 14 Jun 2007
Posts: 3345
Location: Rasi, Finland
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 06, 2021 1:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| flysideways wrote: | | the likes of which used to only live there, are now spreading through the forum. |
If you spot posts that break the forum rules, please report them. Reporting posts greatly helps us with keeping these forums clean and spam free.
Thank you.
_________________
..: Zucca :..
Gentoo IRC channels reside on Libera.Chat.
--
| Quote: | | I am NaN! I am a man! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alamahant
Advocate
Joined: 23 Mar 2019
Posts: 3879
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 06, 2021 5:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Oh My God
I had a look in this OTW thingie.
I could have never imagined........
How is Gentoo governed from an administrative perspective?
Who does what?
Is there a link plz that might be shared?
I have only heard about the Gentoo Foundation..
_________________
Last edited by alamahant on Tue Jul 06, 2021 5:45 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 54237
Location: 56N 3W
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 06, 2021 5:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
alamahant,
There is the Foundation and the Council.
The council terms of reference are GLEP 39. The Foundation is attempting to wind itself up and donate the residual assets to an umbrella to be managed on behalf of Gentoo.
Then there will only be the council.
Can we stop the discussion of OTW or OTW2 please
It does not belong in this topic and possibly not on the Gentoo Forums at all.
_________________
Regards,
NeddySeagoon
Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alamahant
Advocate
Joined: 23 Mar 2019
Posts: 3879
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 06, 2021 5:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks Neddy for the clarity.
Over time I and many many others like me-- i suppose --have fallen in love with Gentoo.
Something to cherish..
I just hope it will have longevity and always be a gateway to user freedom and choice...
Are we in danger of loosing this?
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 54237
Location: 56N 3W
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 06, 2021 6:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
alamahant,
There is that risk. With the present arrangement, Gentoo developers are in charge of all aspects of Gentoo.
Essentially, the Foundation runs the business and legal side and the Council the technical side.
There is little overlap.
When the business and legal side passes to an umbrella, it will hold all Gentoos assets and will essentially have legal control.
The trick is to find an umbrella with a good history that will have us. Gentoo is too big for the smaller umbrellas.
Staffing the foundation has always been a problem. Compare the candidates list for trustees to that for council. There is almost no competition for trustee positions, so continuing to run our own legal entity is not really an option. In short, very few devs want to run then the business side of Gentoo.
On the bright side, many other projects us an umbrella successfully, so Gentoo won't be first.
_________________
Regards,
NeddySeagoon
Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GDH-gentoo
Veteran
Joined: 20 Jul 2019
Posts: 1530
Location: South America
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 06, 2021 10:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Huh. Let's see:
- "The ultimate guide to EAPI 7" is essentially summary of the changes introduced in the version of the PMS that was approved at the time of that writing.
- It says that the "PMS bans the package.provided file from profiles in EAPI 7" which is a true statement: the ban is stated in section 5.2.9 of that document.
- Section 5.2.9 is part of section 5 of the PMS, named "Profiles". The phrase in that blog article is contained in a section named "Profile changes". And the word profile has a very specific and well defined meaning:
| Quote: | | Each profile is a directory containing any number of the files described in this chapter, and possibly inheriting another profile. The files themselves follow a few basic conventions as regards inheritance and format; these are described in the next section. It may also contain any number of subdirectories containing other profiles. |
Anything under /etc/portage, as the name implies, is Portage-specific. And, despite the name, /etc/portage/profile is not a "profile" in the PMS sense. It's a Portage-specific mechanism for performing user overrides.Therefore, I don't see any other possible interpretation than this one:
| asturm wrote: | | [...] the quoted paragraph is explicitly talking about p.provided support in profiles. As long as your PMS compliant package manager of choice is supporting a p.provided directory below /etc/portage you are fine, EAPI-7 is completely irrelevant there. |
And find no inaccuracies in that blog article either. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
asturm
Developer
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 8936
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 07, 2021 6:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ...and everyone who aren't proudly wearing their confirmation bias have come to realize that meanwhile. Thanks for going the extra mile to make it even more clear @GDH-gentoo. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sam_
Developer
Joined: 14 Aug 2020
Posts: 1678
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2021 12:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
For what it's worth, mgorny did indeed update his blog post after I mentioned some confusion. He happily did so (commit):
| mgorny's blog wrote: |
Note:
This applies to use of package.provided in the repository. It does not apply to the use in /etc/portage.
|
If anybody has suggestions for phrasing (I didn't receive any when I asked before here) or enhancing the description, just let me know. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 54237
Location: 56N 3W
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2021 7:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
sam_,
Its an unfortunate choice of words. I read use as in USE flags, not as in to use.
Maybe change | Quote: | | This applies to use of package.provided in the repository. It does not apply to the use in /etc/portage. |
This applies to package.provided in the repository. It does not apply to the users /etc/portage//profile/package.provided
to avoid the differing meanings of the word USE.
_________________
Regards,
NeddySeagoon
Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Gentoo Chat
