[2022-09-17T00:01:40Z] <illiliti> but it can't be that simple right?
[2022-09-17T00:01:49Z] <illiliti> what i'm missing?
[2022-09-17T00:58:28Z] <ioraff> illiliti: how would the package manager know what provides /usr/lib/libLLVM.so?
[2022-09-17T01:00:12Z] <illiliti> grep /usr/lib/libLLVM.so /var/db/kiss/installed/*/manifest
[2022-09-17T01:00:52Z] <illiliti> basically kiss-owns
[2022-09-17T01:01:14Z] <ioraff> but if a package that provides it isn't installed, the pm won't know what dependency to resolve
[2022-09-17T01:02:33Z] <illiliti> then it's up to user which package to install to satisfy dependency
[2022-09-17T01:04:03Z] <illiliti> we could also include manifests into repo to automate that
[2022-09-17T01:06:39Z] <illiliti> or leave a comment to suggest which dependency to install
[2022-09-17T01:06:52Z] <illiliti> /usr/lib/libLLVM.so make # llvm, llvm-fat
[2022-09-17T01:08:08Z] <midfavila> if the manifests were included, that could work
[2022-09-17T01:08:16Z] <midfavila> otherwise I fail to see how it would be an improvement over the current system
[2022-09-17T01:09:08Z] <ioraff> manifests won't be constant until the package manager sandboxes builds
[2022-09-17T01:10:42Z] <ioraff> even so, a manifest could be different under a different version of a package in the build environment
[2022-09-17T01:11:32Z] <illiliti> fair, let's proceed to another option
[2022-09-17T01:12:16Z] <illiliti> what about symlinks? has anyone tried to implement provides using them?
[2022-09-17T01:23:45Z] <ioraff> what do you mean?
[2022-09-17T01:26:13Z] <illiliti> pkg -> llvm(symlink) -> llvm-fat
[2022-09-17T01:26:48Z] <illiliti> pkg depends file: llvm make
[2022-09-17T01:27:39Z] <illiliti> after build is complete, we could change llvm to llvm-fat in depends file
[2022-09-17T01:28:05Z] <illiliti> so /var/db/kiss/installed/pkg/depends will have: llvm-fat make
[2022-09-17T01:28:44Z] <illiliti> or just keep: llvm make
[2022-09-17T01:29:17Z] <illiliti> i didn't measure which one is better
[2022-09-17T01:30:44Z] <illiliti> we would need a new tool to control symlinks though
[2022-09-17T01:33:07Z] <illiliti> actually provides is possible already via abusing KISS_PATH and repos
[2022-09-17T01:33:20Z] <illiliti> but it isn't great
[2022-09-17T01:41:42Z] <ioraff> I feel a provides file is still the best option. seems the most flexible and least opaque
[2022-09-17T01:45:30Z] <illiliti> yeah
[2022-09-17T01:46:14Z] <illiliti> i'm just looking at other options to make sure we didn't miss anything
[2022-09-17T01:57:19Z] <illiliti> how kiss supposed to choose "provided" dependency if there are many of them?
[2022-09-17T01:57:52Z] <illiliti> if prompt - i don't like it
[2022-09-17T01:59:50Z] <illiliti> priority? i suspect that would make logic more complicated
[2022-09-17T02:03:19Z] <ioraff> I had only imagined a prompt. priority wouldn't let the pm be agnostic about package names, and has the possibility of packages claiming the same priority.
[2022-09-17T02:04:03Z] <illiliti> prompt sucks
[2022-09-17T02:04:32Z] <illiliti> i'd rather bail out and let user decide which dependency to install
[2022-09-17T02:06:31Z] <ioraff> that's functionally equivalent to a prompt. x package needs y -> pm lists all the packages in KISS_PATH that provide y -> prompt for which to install or exit and have the user manually install one.
[2022-09-17T02:07:52Z] <illiliti> yeah but without input parsing nonsense
[2022-09-17T02:08:15Z] <illiliti> if we could make it a simple Y/N, then ok
[2022-09-17T02:10:32Z] <illiliti> we also have KISS_PROMPT. we should respect it somehow
[2022-09-17T02:13:59Z] <ioraff> it'd just be parsing a number. I wonder how every other distro that has a similar function determines what package is the default.
[2022-09-17T02:15:02Z] <illiliti> priority, as far as i'm aware
[2022-09-17T02:27:33Z] <illiliti> no other way
[2022-09-17T02:33:58Z] <illiliti> if multiple packages have same priority then abort()
[2022-09-17T02:34:26Z] <illiliti> any other options?
[2022-09-17T04:07:02Z] <testuser[m]1> Hi
[2022-09-17T04:07:31Z] <virutalmachineus> hi
[2022-09-17T04:08:11Z] <ioraff> hi
[2022-09-17T04:20:10Z] <testuser[m]1> illiliti: how is priority decided
[2022-09-17T05:30:49Z] <testuser[m]1> Also we should prompt to rebuild every package that depends on the provider that has been changed
[2022-09-17T05:31:25Z] <testuser[m]1> wait no
[2022-09-17T05:31:43Z] <testuser[m]1> yea
[2022-09-17T05:32:57Z] <testuser[m]1> no
[2022-09-17T05:33:10Z] <ioraff> no
[2022-09-17T05:47:42Z] <virutalmachineus> but why not!!!
[2022-09-17T05:48:20Z] <virutalmachineus> my CPU is idle everyday, it needs a workout once in a while.
[2022-09-17T05:49:38Z] <virutalmachineus> My CPU needs to be in tip top shape when I need to compile chromium.
[2022-09-17T05:51:15Z] <virutalmachineus> getting the CPU warmup can increase performance by 0.00843% 
[2022-09-17T06:57:09Z] <wael[m]> is there a tool that can automatically fill in the commit message for a kiss package update/new  ?
[2022-09-17T06:57:29Z] <wael[m]> eg kiss commit <package> and it automatically adds the package and does the commit message on if its a new or a update 
[2022-09-17T07:09:35Z] <testuser[m]1> cm() { git add $1; git commit -m "$1: $(awk '{print $1}' $1/version)"; }
[2022-09-17T07:29:33Z] <wael[m]> fair enough
[2022-09-17T07:45:13Z] <testuser[m]1> what should be done about unrelated packages tainting other packages due to auto enabled features?
[2022-09-17T07:45:27Z] <testuser[m]1> eg freetype-harfbuzz just got built with brotli support cuz i have android fools installed
[2022-09-17T07:49:17Z] <ioraff> sandboxed builds
[2022-09-17T07:49:42Z] <testuser[m]1> that came to my mind too but it's unportable
[2022-09-17T07:51:04Z] <testuser[m]1> it could be portable with enough ifdefs
[2022-09-17T07:51:21Z] <testuser[m]1> also SUID vs user namespaces vs landlock vs ...
[2022-09-17T07:53:40Z] <testuser[m]1> enumerating all possible build options like genpoo doesnt seem feasible / reliable
[2022-09-17T07:57:33Z] <ioraff> fall back to unprivileged builds. and probably landlock, but it'd require a relatively new kernel
[2022-09-17T07:58:02Z] <testuser[m]1> it can have all backends ig
[2022-09-17T08:00:33Z] <ioraff> I guess the number of people using KISS on another kernel is about 0.
[2022-09-17T08:06:08Z] <wael[m]> tbf having sandboxed builds can introduce the possibility of having make dependencies not being installed on the host system
[2022-09-17T08:06:26Z] <wael[m]> that as well can introduce the possibility of having *-libs *-devel packages
[2022-09-17T08:06:37Z] <ioraff> good, then the depends files will actually be accurate
[2022-09-17T08:06:53Z] <ioraff> don't see how it'd require split packages
[2022-09-17T08:07:14Z] <wael[m]> it can save some space on the host system by having development/library packages at build time
[2022-09-17T08:07:26Z] <wael[m]> an example of this is xbps-src, unfortunately its bash only and probably isnt portable
[2022-09-17T08:09:58Z] <ioraff> both are still required at build time
[2022-09-17T08:11:05Z] <testuser[m]1> split packages dont make sense on any source based distro
[2022-09-17T08:11:21Z] <wael[m]> true, gentoo doesnt split packages
[2022-09-17T08:11:31Z] <wael[m]> probably does but not for splitting devel libs and stuff
[2022-09-17T08:12:19Z] <ioraff> the only advantage you'd have is not needing headers to be installed outside of build time
[2022-09-17T08:20:18Z] <testuser[m]1> https://github.com/kiss-community/repo/issues/108
[2022-09-17T15:02:17Z] <testuser[m]1> https://github.com/jtheoof/swappy
[2022-09-17T15:03:52Z] <illiliti> we can reserve second field for priority
[2022-09-17T15:03:56Z] <illiliti> i.e: <name> <uint>
[2022-09-17T15:04:09Z] <illiliti> package with higher number has higher priority
[2022-09-17T15:04:54Z] <illiliti> based on that we reorder "provided" dependencies
[2022-09-17T15:05:48Z] <illiliti> if user has set KISS_PROMPT, package with highest priority will be default
[2022-09-17T15:06:08Z] <illiliti> KISS_PROMPT=0 to be exact
[2022-09-17T15:14:11Z] <testuser[m]1> Where is the priority field going to be set and how would it make sense for independent repos
[2022-09-17T15:14:48Z] <illiliti> in provides file
[2022-09-17T15:15:40Z] <illiliti> what is independent repo
[2022-09-17T15:15:53Z] <testuser[m]1> Repo doesn't have knowledge of other repo
[2022-09-17T15:16:05Z] <testuser[m]1> llvm-fat provides file would have `llvm 2` 
[2022-09-17T15:16:12Z] <testuser[m]1> llvm-superfat would have .
[2022-09-17T15:16:40Z] <midfavila> >mfw github requires JS to access release tarballs now
[2022-09-17T15:18:13Z] <illiliti> soydevs don't have anything better to do than reworking ui it seems
[2022-09-17T15:18:45Z] <midfavila> fortunately you can access releases in plaintext using https://github.com/$AUTHOR/releases/expanded_assets/$RELTAG
[2022-09-17T15:19:01Z] <midfavila> well, not plaintext, but minimally formatted HTML
[2022-09-17T15:19:46Z] <illiliti> llvm-superfat would have: llvm 1 ?
[2022-09-17T15:21:00Z] <illiliti> llvm-sane would have: llvm 3
[2022-09-17T15:21:09Z] <illiliti> what problem are you implying? 
[2022-09-17T15:26:28Z] <testuser[m]1> I mean if u have llvm in main repo, llvm-fat in some zig repo, llvm-superfat in some $LANG repo and each repo is maintained by different authors
[2022-09-17T15:26:34Z] <testuser[m]1> how would they set propriety
[2022-09-17T15:26:40Z] <testuser[m]1> priority
[2022-09-17T15:27:08Z] <testuser[m]1> Also what does a priority greater than 2 mean
[2022-09-17T15:27:25Z] <testuser[m]1> It's either sane package or modified package
[2022-09-17T15:30:28Z] <illiliti> well, some coordination would be required
[2022-09-17T15:31:17Z] <illiliti> and IMHO must not have same priority
[2022-09-17T15:31:24Z] <illiliti> packages*
[2022-09-17T15:32:19Z] <illiliti> values of priority have no special meaning
[2022-09-17T15:33:12Z] <illiliti> so if modified package has 4, i.e highest priority, then it will be default1
[2022-09-17T15:33:30Z] <illiliti> same if package has 400 priority
[2022-09-17T15:33:38Z] <illiliti> it doesn't matter
[2022-09-17T15:34:30Z] <illiliti> we could reserve 0 for something special, but i don't know for what
[2022-09-17T15:37:00Z] <testuser[m]1> What about just making automatic decision based on repo priority
[2022-09-17T15:38:03Z] <testuser[m]1> Or better just error out if kiss prompt is set and print msg to `kiss select llvm llvm-fat` or something
[2022-09-17T15:40:29Z] <illiliti> yeah, that's my first thought
[2022-09-17T15:41:01Z] <testuser[m]1> erroring out is appropriate according to kiss ideas stuff should be explicit
[2022-09-17T15:43:05Z] <illiliti> > What about just making automatic decision based on repo priority
[2022-09-17T15:43:08Z] <illiliti> that's how people implement provides right now
[2022-09-17T15:43:40Z] <illiliti> KISS_PATH="./modified:./orig"
[2022-09-17T15:44:15Z] <illiliti> kiss b pkg will take llvm from modified
[2022-09-17T15:44:45Z] <illiliti> reorder KISS_PATH and you have provides system
[2022-09-17T15:45:09Z] <illiliti> but as i said it isn't that great
[2022-09-17T15:46:15Z] <illiliti> there are some limitations
[2022-09-17T15:47:24Z] <testuser[m]1> What do u think about the erroring out idea
[2022-09-17T15:48:43Z] <testuser[m]1> For me erroring > decision on repo priority > priority system
[2022-09-17T15:49:25Z] <illiliti> it's fine
[2022-09-17T16:42:40Z] <testuser[m]1> illiliti: https://github.com/kiss-community/kiss/pull/73/files
[2022-09-17T16:42:42Z] <testuser[m]1> Does it look ok
[2022-09-17T16:43:04Z] <testuser[m]1> I'll make new release with rpath fix and this fix before major changes like b3 or destdir stuff
[2022-09-17T16:53:29Z] <illiliti> looks good
[2022-09-17T16:56:30Z] <illiliti> should we unbundle zip/unzip from firefox as well?
[2022-09-17T16:56:46Z] <testuser[m]1> I added it to issue already
[2022-09-17T16:56:56Z] <testuser[m]1> i think we should
[2022-09-17T17:00:45Z] <testuser[m]1> Btw yasm doesn't seem to be needed at all
[2022-09-17T17:02:35Z] <testuser[m]1> illiliti: what about gcc mpfr mpc gmp
[2022-09-17T17:07:31Z] <illiliti> hard to say
[2022-09-17T17:08:01Z] <illiliti> probably should be unbundled too
[2022-09-17T17:23:11Z] <illiliti> libwebp, ttf-croscore must use https
[2022-09-17T17:27:07Z] <illiliti> https://storage.googleapis.com/downloads.webmproject.org/releases/webp/libwebp-VERSION.tar.gz
[2022-09-17T17:29:17Z] <testuser[m]1> illiliti: are u in college
[2022-09-17T17:29:35Z] <illiliti> no
[2022-09-17T17:30:02Z] <testuser[m]1> job?
[2022-09-17T17:30:20Z] <illiliti> yep
[2022-09-17T17:30:31Z] <testuser[m]1> Oh
[2022-09-17T17:33:35Z] <illiliti> i wouldn't call it job tho
[2022-09-17T17:33:59Z] <illiliti> typical underpaid shithole is better name
[2022-09-17T17:34:25Z] <testuser[m]1> oof
[2022-09-17T21:22:59Z] <virutalmachineus> how much are you talking about?
[2022-09-17T21:23:49Z] <virutalmachineus> 2.50?
[2022-09-17T22:00:19Z] <illiliti> usd per hour? about that yeah
[2022-09-17T22:08:54Z] <illiliti> i know people who survive on 250$ per month
[2022-09-17T22:09:17Z] <illiliti> most of them are pensioners
[2022-09-17T22:10:40Z] <illiliti> half goes on bills
[2022-09-17T22:11:08Z] <illiliti> some goes on medicine and stuff
[2022-09-17T22:11:20Z] <illiliti> some goes on food
[2022-09-17T22:11:29Z] <illiliti> and you have 0
[2022-09-17T22:35:08Z] <illiliti> should we enable new-dtags by default for binutils?
[2022-09-17T22:40:49Z] <ioraff> do you mean add that flag when building binutils or set that flag when the linker is bfd/gold?
[2022-09-17T22:51:19Z] <illiliti> i mean add configure option
[2022-09-17T22:51:24Z] <illiliti> --enable-new-dtags
[2022-09-17T23:16:02Z] <illiliti> also --enable-default-hash-style=gnu
[2022-09-17T23:16:18Z] <illiliti> for DT_GNU_HASH
[2022-09-17T23:16:43Z] <illiliti> it seems to be better than DT_HASH, but non-standard