After removing the masked x11-base/xorg-x11[fonts] emerge --depclean wanted to remove a lot of packages including way too many fonts packages. My latest test shows that depclean tries to remove 33 fonts packages, even after installing media-fonts/fonts-meta with all use flags enabled. I made a xorg-fonts-0.1.ebuild package that contains all the fonts from x11-base/xorg-x11[fonts] excluding media-fonts/font-bh-ttf which is non-free according to Bug #872119 Reproducible: Always
Created attachment 815128 [details, diff] xorg-fonts package
Sorry for hijacking the issue, maybe it's worth to create a new one, but not only fonts packages are removed, but also 24 other packages: x11-apps/bitmap x11-apps/smproxy x11-apps/x11perf x11-apps/xbacklight x11-apps/xcmsdb x11-apps/xcursorgen x11-apps/xdpyinfo x11-apps/xdriinfo x11-apps/xf86dga x11-apps/xhost x11-apps/xinput x11-apps/xkbevd x11-apps/xkbutils x11-apps/xkill x11-apps/xlsatoms x11-apps/xlsclients x11-apps/xmodmap x11-apps/xpr x11-apps/xrandr x11-apps/xrefresh x11-apps/xvinfo x11-apps/xwd x11-apps/xwud x11-themes/xcursor-themes It doesn't looks like it's safe to remove them all, some are for sure required for any (or at least most of) desktop systems. Is there other meta packages containing some subset of these or all desktop users must manually add these 24 packages to the world?
This is exactly why I *don't* want to have the metapackage: everyone has a different opinion about what should be in it. Let me introduce you to Portage Sets: https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Package_sets
(In reply to Matt Turner from comment #3) > This is exactly why I *don't* want to have the metapackage: everyone has a > different opinion about what should be in it. > > Let me introduce you to Portage Sets: > https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Package_sets I'm not arguing for keeping metapackage and I know about package sets. I was asking about recommended upgrade path for desktop users. Just blindly removing all packages I listed above is unlikely a good idea: some of them are often used in scripts, others looks like system-important (which may or may not be true) and their removal may broke some rarely used features which will be notices weeks later. Probably removal of this metapackage worth own news item describing possible issues and recommended upgrade path.
I'll continue the hijack and make a case for xorg-x11 to remain for the tools. The fonts don't matter. They're already gated behind an useflag and could be removed as a dependency entirely. Bitmap fonts are mostly irrelevant to modern systems, and those wishing to use them will surely not install these, but something cool like terminus-font. The tools are a mixed case. Many are probably irrelevant to a device made in the 21st century. Some, like xset, xev, xrandr, xinput, xmodmap are useful in their own right or are frequently used in other tools/scripts, which assume their presence. Matt is right in that it can boil down to personal opinion. But there's still a case to be made for a meta-package (not a set) to provide a basic functional X-server. Not even experienced users can be expected to navigate this tool jungle and make their own set.
(In reply to haarp from comment #5) > Some, like xset, xev, xrandr, xinput, xmodmap are useful > in their own right or are frequently used in other tools/scripts, which > assume their presence. Whichever packages are installing scripts that make use of these tools should be fixed to RDEPEND on the individual tool packages. Granted, it may take a while to find and fix all of them, and users' systems will be subtly (or not so subtly) broken in the meantime.
I second to keep the meta package. An Xorg installation is not just dependencies for other packages, it is also a working set of tools that I use from the command line. I know that portage deals with software depending on other software but it won't deal with me depending on working complex things like X and KDE without the meta package and I have missed a lot of those that went missing (like the qt meta package for developing towards qt). Just imagine the complexity of a usable KDE without meta-packages. I found this bug because I was uncertain of the upgrade path and missed the news item that usually comes with those kind of changes so I second a news info as well.
Just a reminder that y'all are all capable of making pull requests.
The bug has been closed via the following commit(s): https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=b9ccfc75cfd84824c268d2ef82e2969a0cdc4fdb commit b9ccfc75cfd84824c268d2ef82e2969a0cdc4fdb Author: Matt Turner <mattst88@gentoo.org> AuthorDate: 2022-10-13 05:01:30 +0000 Commit: Matt Turner <mattst88@gentoo.org> CommitDate: 2022-10-13 16:24:56 +0000 x11-base/xorg-fonts: Add new metapackage Thanks to Marius Stoica for the proposal and initial ebuild. Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/872119 Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/873973 Closes: https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/27762 Signed-off-by: Matt Turner <mattst88@gentoo.org> x11-base/xorg-fonts/metadata.xml | 9 ++++++ x11-base/xorg-fonts/xorg-fonts-1.ebuild | 54 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 63 insertions(+)
I've additionally pushed a x11-base/xorg-apps metapackage that RDEPENDs on all the x11-apps/ packages from https://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/app/ It's purpose is to pull in all the x11-apps/ packages from https://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/app/, not to be some package that we debate over what is useful for users.
