Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!

Bug 566324

Summary: dev-libs/libgdata: make gnome-online-accounts controllable by its own USE flag
Product: Gentoo Linux Reporter: Rok Kralj <gentoo>
Component: [OLD] GNOMEAssignee: Gentoo Linux Gnome Desktop Team <gnome>
Severity: normal    
Priority: Normal    
Version: unspecified   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---

Description Rok Kralj 2015-11-20 11:29:24 UTC
dev-libs/libgdata is the only package that requires net-libs/gnome-online-accounts, all other packages play nice and include it conditionally on an USE flag appropriately named gnome-online-accounts. This would allow many users to be able to get rid of the troubling webkit-gtk (requires ruby, long build times, a lot of bugs).

This is present in the ebuild:

	gnome2_src_configure \
		$(use_enable gnome) \
		$(use_enable gnome goa) \

which I think should not be so, but goa should be conditional even one level deeper on the use flag gnome-online-accounts.
Comment 1 Gilles Dartiguelongue gentoo-dev 2015-12-13 21:41:36 UTC
I agree with this change however it seems USE=gnome is misleading here for the rest of the features as well. According to and as confirmed by reading the code, --enable-gnome enables password retrieval using gcr APIs which avoids leaking the passwords to pageable memory. As such it should be either renamed to USE=crypt or enabled always altogether. Moving gnome-online-accounts to its own USE flag would then be a no brainer.
Comment 2 Rok Kralj 2015-12-13 22:46:18 UTC
May I add that the chain to webkit-gtk can be broken earlier, see my other bug:
Comment 3 Pacho Ramos gentoo-dev 2015-12-14 15:36:18 UTC
Looks like upstream splitted goa support for this purpose of avoiding webkit-gtk dep, then, adding the gnome-online-accounts USE flag would be ok

Regarding renaming "gnome" to "crypt", I don't mind :/ (well, we need to remember to put a REQUIRED_USE statement to ensure gnome-online-accounts USE requests gnome/crypto USE)
Comment 4 Gilles Dartiguelongue gentoo-dev 2015-12-16 08:12:27 UTC
Yes, it is annoying because it means we need to add || ( gcr[crypto] gcr[gnome] ) in most ebuilds using it but I can take care of that. I will try to find other optional usage of gcr and see with upstream if changing the name of the configure switch is relevant for them too.
Comment 5 Pacho Ramos gentoo-dev 2015-12-16 11:15:13 UTC
Well, if we rename libgdata[gnome] to libgdata[crypto] it looks like only a few ebuilds will be affected
gnome-base/gvfs/gvfs-1.26.2.ebuild:		>=dev-libs/libgdata-0.17.3:=[gnome]
gnome-extra/gnome-documents/gnome-documents-3.16.4.ebuild:	>=dev-libs/libgdata-0.13.3:=[gnome,introspection]
gnome-extra/gnome-documents/gnome-documents-3.18.2.ebuild:	>=dev-libs/libgdata-0.13.3:=[gnome,introspection]
net-misc/gnome-online-miners/gnome-online-miners-3.14.3.ebuild:	>=dev-libs/libgdata-0.15.2:0=[gnome]
net-misc/gnome-online-miners/gnome-online-miners-3.14.3-r1.ebuild:	>=dev-libs/libgdata-0.15.2:0=[gnome]

As we are now forced per policy to revbump when changing RDEPENDs like this, I would simply move the deps to libgdata[crypto] instead of || ( libgdata[gnome] to libgdata[crypto] ) to prevent we needing to revbump again when libgdata[gnome] disappears in the future and also strange blockers that could arise when people mix some packages from testing and stable
Comment 6 Rok Kralj 2015-12-23 12:29:58 UTC
So, if I understand correctly, this referenced bug just shows this split of gnome USE flag to two separate "crypt" and "goa" is even more urgently needed.
Comment 7 Gilles Dartiguelongue gentoo-dev 2015-12-23 23:24:50 UTC
It shows there is a need for a more fine-grained control yes, but there is nothing urgent about it. Given the extent of changes needed it won't be done in a flick of a finger anyway.
Comment 8 Rok Kralj 2015-12-28 21:17:32 UTC
See this, it is urgent.

There is a need to deal away with this horrendous piece of software.
Comment 9 Gilles Dartiguelongue gentoo-dev 2015-12-28 22:55:32 UTC
No, you have the needed controls already, even though they are not perfect.
Comment 10 Gilles Dartiguelongue gentoo-dev 2015-12-28 22:57:29 UTC
(In reply to Gilles Dartiguelongue from comment #9)
> No, you have the needed controls already, even though they are not perfect.

Also, from the quick check I had earlier with #-security, we are fine with 2.10.4.
Comment 11 Pacho Ramos gentoo-dev 2015-12-30 10:24:53 UTC
Fixed in -r1