Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 311731 - [Future EAPI] Add support for use flag renames to profiles/updates
Summary: [Future EAPI] Add support for use flag renames to profiles/updates
Status: CONFIRMED
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Hosted Projects
Classification: Unclassified
Component: PMS/EAPI (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: High normal with 1 vote (vote)
Assignee: PMS/EAPI
URL: http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev...
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks: future-eapi
  Show dependency tree
 
Reported: 2010-03-28 11:01 UTC by Petteri Räty (RETIRED)
Modified: 2019-09-28 18:25 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Petteri Räty (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2010-03-28 11:01:25 UTC
http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_6d0c9c4226e3b37001e760a8d92a69e7.xml

What is needed is to tweak the tools for such a move- specifically 
adding a new command to the update machinery (profiles/updates).  
Something roughly like

usemove [atom] original_flag new_flag

zmedico: What
Comment 1 Justin Lecher (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2011-04-04 12:07:12 UTC
Petteri, is that bug in the right category? Don't we just need changes in portage?
Comment 2 Petteri Räty (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2011-04-04 12:22:24 UTC
(In reply to comment #1)
> Petteri, is that bug in the right category? Don't we just need changes in
> portage?

I don't see why this would be Portage specific. Developers need to be modifying files covered by PMS.
Comment 3 Justin Lecher (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2011-04-04 12:27:57 UTC
No, that wasn't what I meant. In my languageit is defined as "portage == package-manager", which reflects my limited usage of others.
My question was more, why does it need to be related to an EAPI? To me it seems to be more PM internals specific.

In summary, I'd like to speed up the realization and inclusion.
Comment 4 Ciaran McCreesh 2011-04-04 12:29:36 UTC
The format of updates is covered by PMS.
Comment 5 Petteri Räty (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2011-04-04 12:37:11 UTC
(In reply to comment #3)
> No, that wasn't what I meant. In my languageit is defined as "portage ==
> package-manager", which reflects my limited usage of others.
> My question was more, why does it need to be related to an EAPI? To me it seems
> to be more PM internals specific.
> 

It's a file that developers update. Ideally the file would behave identically across all package managers.
Comment 6 Justin Lecher (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2011-04-04 12:40:37 UTC
So whom do I have to talk to to speed things up here?
Comment 7 Ciaran McCreesh 2011-04-04 12:46:23 UTC
You need a design that everyone likes, then you need an implementation in Portage.

Having said that, moves are bad. We shouldn't be making things even worse than they already are.
Comment 8 Ulrich Müller gentoo-dev 2019-08-23 16:45:08 UTC
No progress since 8 years. Is anyone still interested in this feature? Otherwise, I shall close this bug.
Comment 9 Michał Górny archtester Gentoo Infrastructure gentoo-dev Security 2019-09-28 18:25:22 UTC
This would be extremely hard to do.  Besides needing some kind of alias logic to keep pkg_* phases of binpkgs/vdb working, there is a problem of USE dependencies.

I don't think this would really work fine as global moves.  For per-package moves, it could result in breaking '[foo?]' kind of USE-deps ­— we would probably have to introduce flag mapping syntax first.