Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 39501 - feature request: emerge should report any change on ebuilds
Summary: feature request: emerge should report any change on ebuilds
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Linux
Classification: Unclassified
Component: New packages (show other bugs)
Hardware: All All
: High normal (vote)
Assignee: Portage team
Depends on:
Reported: 2004-01-26 14:05 UTC by Radek Podgorny
Modified: 2004-03-20 14:28 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

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


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Radek Podgorny 2004-01-26 14:05:51 UTC
IMHO, the -r number of every changed ebuild should be bumped since it's the only way to tell the users about the modification...

For example, the xfree ebuild has included some up-to-date versions of the SiS graphics driver and if didn't try to re-emerge it just for fun I wouldn't even know! This is bad since I choosed Gentoo to be on the bleeding edge... :-(

Only sky is the limit when increasing these numbers so I don't get the reason why maintainers are so affraid to do so... I think it should be in the "maintainer's policy" (if something like that exists)...

Comment 1 Donnie Berkholz (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2004-01-26 14:08:03 UTC
If it doesn't affect a significant portion of users, in most cases it is not bumped. Another example would be a patch for CJK (chinese, japanese, korean) support, again not affecting a significant portion of users.

The point is saving the majority of users what's essentially a USELESS compilation so that the minority can benefit from a fix.
Comment 2 Radek Podgorny 2004-01-26 14:42:43 UTC
Yeah, but real change from program XYZ version to can be a typo correction in the source and still it's bumped... :-)

How do I know something has changed, then? Should I watch the ChangeLogs every day? That's impossible. I think it would be better to bump the number and let user decide whether the change is important enough for him (using the --changelog argument). Seems much better to me then the opposite way (users searching the changelogs for changes manually)...

I think most Gentoo users are the advanced ones and they would be happy if such decision (about the importance of a modification) is left up to them rather than the developers... :-)

Comment 3 Mr. Bones. (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2004-01-26 14:53:45 UTC
For "advanced" users, they can create a script that checks the installed version
of the ebuild with the one in portage and update when there is a difference.

It is up to the developer to decided if an ebuild will get a -r bump or not
since they are arguably the most qualified to make that decision.

Marking this bug as INVALID.
Comment 4 Radek Podgorny 2004-01-26 15:14:58 UTC
Do you have time to write that script? I don't... :-( Bumping the number is a zero-time operation...

Recompiling? Isn't that what Gentoo is all about?
Comment 5 Seemant Kulleen (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2004-01-26 15:29:23 UTC
please, the script can't be that hard, your installed ebuilds are in /var/db/pkg, and the new ebuilds are in /usr/portage, run diffs, and report to yourself.

while you're recompiling xfree for the next (useless to you) nvidia driver update, I'm sure you can tweak such a script.
Comment 6 Radek Podgorny 2004-01-26 15:41:47 UTC

While I still can't see what's so bad about "useless" recompilation (I run emerge niced on the background, you don't?) I have to stick with what you think it's correct... :-)

Can't you at least issue a feature request for portage, please? Something like "emerge -u --any-change world"... I really think this kind of feature should be made kind of official or else the maintainers are doing useless work (if users can't benefit from it since they even don't know)... :-(


P.S.: I have the nvidia card on the other machine... :-)
Comment 7 Seemant Kulleen (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2004-01-26 15:56:44 UTC
ok, let the portage team look at your request
Comment 8 Radek Podgorny 2004-01-26 16:03:27 UTC
Thank you...

Comment 9 Marius Mauch (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2004-01-26 16:49:20 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 38671 ***
Comment 10 Radek Podgorny 2004-01-26 23:04:23 UTC
Are you sure about the duplicity?

Comment 11 foser (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2004-01-27 03:58:17 UTC
I'm not sure about the dupe either.

Actually, the reporter has a point. Every change in an ebuild that results in a different output should be revision bumped. I know this may be a lot of rev bumps for some packs, but this is our way to test stuff. As ~arch user you sort of volunteer to do this more frequent recompilation. The concern of users rebuilding too much should only be a concern in the stable tree. It is a different thing if something is actively being worked on in p.mask, it can stay at the same revision then.
Comment 12 Radek Podgorny 2004-01-27 05:35:27 UTC
Thanks for the support, I was about to feel a bit odd with my opinions... :-)

Comment 13 Marius Mauch (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2004-01-27 10:08:17 UTC
I still think it's a dupe as revision bumps without a feature to ignore them (as requested in the other bug) will result in unhappy users who wonder why they have to recompile stuff so often. 
While the motivations are opposite the requested feature is basically the same. But if people disagree I'll leave this open.
Comment 14 Radek Podgorny 2004-01-27 14:26:08 UTC
Please, take a look at the other bug again (#38671), I can't find anything but some new file. No complaints or stuff... :-(

Comment 15 Marius Mauch (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2004-01-27 14:54:05 UTC
ups, sorry. Misread the bug number it seems.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 38674 ***
Comment 16 Keith Lea 2004-01-27 15:54:49 UTC
I don't think this is a duplicate of bug 38674, as they are very different requests.

Bugzilla provides a "depends on" and "blocks" feature for the kind of relationship that this bug and bug 38674 have.
Comment 17 Radek Podgorny 2004-01-27 16:07:15 UTC
I agree, something like "depend" would be far better than "duplicate". These are really two different requests... Should I reopen the bug again? :-)

Anyway, the ideas from bug 38674 are good as long as you ensure that the maintainers will bump the "less significant part" on every (even pathetic) change... This way, you can close both bugs... :-)

Comment 18 Seemant Kulleen (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2004-02-02 23:43:03 UTC
its not a dupe
Comment 19 Nicholas Jones (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2004-03-20 14:28:25 UTC
Portage won't be doing this check any time soon. It's
excessive and adds in code depenencies and complexity
which isn't useful for most cases.

I'm closing it. Someone can take the bug if they wish.