[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       gentoo-dev
Subject:    Re: [gentoo-dev] ssl vs openssl vs libressl vs gnutls USE flag foo
From:       hasufell <hasufell () gentoo ! org>
Date:       2015-10-30 23:13:05
Message-ID: 5633F981.1060700 () gentoo ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

On 10/30/2015 11:56 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 23:40:28 +0100
> hasufell <hasufell@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
>> On 10/30/2015 10:16 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
>>> On 10/30/15 3:35 PM, hasufell wrote:  
>>>> On 10/30/2015 06:55 PM, Michał Górny wrote:  
>>>>> We have no way of saying 'I prefer polarssl, then gnutls, then
>>>>> libressl, and never openssl'.  
>>>> I don't think this is something that can be reasonably supported and it
>>>> sounds awfully automagic. And I don't see how this is possible right
>>>> now, so I'm not really sure what you expect to get worse.
>>>>
>>>> E.g. -gnutls pulling in dev-libs/openssl is not really something you'd
>>>> expect. If we go for provider USE flags, then things become consistent,
>>>> explicit and unambiguous. The only problem is our crappy implementation
>>>> of providers USE flags via REQUIRED_USE.
>>>>  
>>> I'm not sure what mgorny has in mind, but the problem I see with saying
>>> I want just X to be my provider system wide is that some pkgs build with
>>> X others don't, other pkgs might need a different provider.  So it might
>>> make sense to order them in terms of preference: X1 > X2 > X3 ... and
>>> then when emerging a package, the first provider in the preference list
>>> that works is pulled in for that package.
>>>   
>>
>> Isn't that basically what the proposal B already was, except that we
>> don't use REQUIRED_USE for it but some sort of pkg_setup/pkg_pretend
>> function? I don't see how those ideas even conflict.
> 
> And some sort of magical USE flag meanings? Please stop this right
> here. We don't need 16 USE flag package variants which mean 4 things in
> different, random and unexpected ways.
> 

I really have no idea what you mean. This is about NOT doing things
magically and not having magical USE flag meanings.

Then you complained that you cannot set gnutls and openssl at the same
time... and the only way around that is not having REQUIRED_USE.

It seems to me you don't really know what you want. Either give an
actual proposal or let us move on.

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]