On 03/06/2016 21:34, waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 10:35:45AM -0400, Ian Stakenvicius wrote
USE=gui is about building the graphical user interface that an
application offers, when it is optional. That's it. What
dependencies that means and so on have nothing to do with the flag.
That reasoning may have been valid many years ago when qt was the only
toolkit around. All GUI-optional apps back then either used qt or wrote
their own primitives directly to X. Fast-forward to 2016. You now have
X/Wayland/Mir/qt4/qt5/gtk2/gtk3/fltk/whatever. If a package can have a
GUI from more than one of the above, you *NEED* to select implementation
type *SOMEWHERE* (make.conf/package.use/profile). Deal with it.
You get that use flags are not supposed to represent dependencies
right, but features of the package??
Gentoo currently assumes that users are reasonably competent, and that
if they've selected specific graphics libs to be linked to a package,
that they've done it for a reason; i.e. to enable a GUI.
Walter,
I think you're missing where the devs want to take this and what USE is
all about. It's about *features*, not about dependencies.
USE="gtk" is a dependency.
USE="gui" is a feature.
You only need enable a specific graphics lib flag when there is
ambiguity about what "gui" means for a package.
Think about a wayland system -- there's lots of packages that
IUSE="X" to build their gui implementation. If someone wanting
wayland set USE="-X" then they don't get the gui app even if it'll
work in wayland just fine.
If someone wants to run a wayland system, why wouldn't they set
USE="-X -mir wayland" in make.conf in the first place?!?!?
Here's my problem with USE="gui"... I've set up various packages which
have the gui/no-gui option. If USE="-gui" overrides USE="X gtk3 qt4 fltk",
then I would have to set USE="gui" *IN ADDITION TO* telling packages
which GUI toolkit to use. Since I may want some packages GUI, and some
non-GUI, that would be one more USE flag to set in package.use and/or
make.conf.
The reason for the pushback is that this "feature" would be rammed
down peoples' throats, Poettering-style. I propose a compromise
solution that both sides should be happy with. It would require 2 USE
flags, namely "forcegui" and "forcenogui".
If "forcegui" is set, all optional-GUI apps will be built with GUIs,
regardless of USE="-X -Mir -Wayland -gtk2 -gtk3 -qt4 -qt5".
If "forcenogui" is set, no optional-GUI apps will be built with GUIs,
regardless of USE="X Mir Wayland gtk2 gtk3 qt4 qt5".
If USE="-forcegui -forcenogui" is set, things will be as they are
today. GUIs will be built, or not, depending on what toolkit flags are
set or not set. Gentoo is about choice.
That's a silly idea not least because it's non-deterministic. A force
USE flag is really just USE="gtk" or USE="qt" on a larger scale as
there's now *more* toolkits to randomly pick one from.
Most apps support one toolkit, often either gtk2/3 or qt4/5. It's a
minority that support both and we have special means to handle those.
For that small set of apps that do support several toolkits, what
exactly are you going to force? If you can have one of gtk 2 or 3 but
not both, which one is it? Well you'd need a USE="gtk2" or USE="gtk3" to
find out what the user wants.
This proposal makes things simpler and reduces flags and their usage.
"gui" means build the gui the thing supports.
"X" stops meaning "gui" or maybe "XLibs" or perhaps "usually RDP but
also supports magic X11" and starts to mean "X11 Window System" as
opposed to Wayland or Mir.
The other toolkit flags start to mean specific versions of toolkits and
only need be used when things get ambiguous and portage wants you you
tell it what you want.
In short, flags will get simpler (as cruft will be removed) and flags
gain clearer distinct names. Think of it as a code refactor after years
of accumulating rubbish due to no clear plan.
Alan
