Marijn Schouten (hkBst) wrote: > Petteri Räty wrote: >> I wrote a script to check which ebuilds use built_with_use and have >> keywords in never versions making the ebuild unused. This means that >> neither arch or ~arch users are likely to install the ebuild. The script >> and the list of ebuilds is attached. I plan on removing all these >> ebuilds two weeks from now unless a reason is given why not to. If you >> see an ebuild on the list that should be kept, please migrate it to EAPI >> 2. If you need assistance in migrating, I can help. With these gone >> built_with_use usage will be down to about 600: > > I have some ebuilds on the list: plt-scheme, stklos, lilypond. I usually clean > up unused ebuilds some time after a new version has gone stable. > > Anyway my question is: what is the point of removing unused versions in the > proposed manner? If the newer version is not ported to EAPI 2 and also uses > built_with_use what do we gain? Even if it is already ported, do we gain > anything by the propsed removal? Are all unused ebuilds evil? >
It saves my time when removing built_with_use from packages that still have active versions using it. Many packages are also unmaintained so the versions with built_with_use don't get removed without doing something like this. > If built_with_use is to be eliminated from the tree I propose that effort is > directed towards porting and stabling ebuilds that still use it. After the > stable version has begun using EAPI 2 use deps, then all uses of > built_with_use > in other versions can be considered obsolete and those ebuilds can be removed > in > one fell sweep if need be. > It will be eliminated eventually. I am in the process of doing so but as you can see from the numbers it takes quite a lot of work to get rid of them. Regards, Petteri
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
