Stuart Herbert | Gentoo

I’ve revbumped the seeds-config/lamp-server-portage package this morning, to change some of the USE flags that it sets in package.use. Doing so made me realise that bumping all the package.* files under seeds-config/lamp-server-portage/files just for a one line change takes too much work.

Instead, I’ve switched the seeds-config/lamp-server-portage to hold the package.* files inside the ebuild itself. Bumping the ebuild is all that you have to do, whenever we need to change the settings.

This has made me look at support for package.use in profiles from a different angle. I’m still in favour of that feature, but I’m no longer so sure that making heavy use of it is right for the Seeds project.

If we change the contents of the profile (e.g., we change the USE flags listed in package.use), but we don’t give the profile a new name … then we’ve changed the behaviour of the profile itself. It’s not like changing a package, where a user gets to choose whether he wants the change or not (he chooses by upgrading to a later version of the package or not). Changing a profile means that we’re forcing a change on a user; the only way they can avoid the change is to avoid syncing, or by versioning their own tree.

In the back of my mind, I’m aware that one possible outcome from the Seeds project is that we might choose to build it against a slower-moving copy of the Gentoo package tree (i.e. the so-called ‘enterprise’ tree). (We’re not doing any work on this atm, btw, before anyone gets their knickers in a twist). If that happens, then the LAMP Server packages and profiles are likely to have a much longer shelf-life than your average Gentoo package. LAMP Server users (if we ever gain any ) will want to be able to roll out identical installs across their web farms. Reproducability (something that the wider Gentoo tree makes difficult) could become an important factor.

So, at the moment, when per-profile package.use comes along, I’m not sure whether or not to switch the seeds-config/lamp-server-portage package over using it or not. It’s going to require a bit more thought.

If we don’t switch, then that’ll probably force our hand, and make us have all the seed packages pin their deps down to exact versions of packages (e.g., explicitly require net-www/apache-2.2.3, instead of just net-www/apache).