autoclean: only enable for global updates and depcleans #795
Conversation
thesamesam
force-pushed
the
autoclean
branch
3 times, most recently
from
15a473d
to
559dd9e
Compare
thesamesam
force-pushed
the
autoclean
branch
2 times, most recently
from
2fcc776
to
9d81a15
Compare
|
@zmedico How should we handle the "AUTOCLEAN is disabled. This can cause serious ..." message? Just drop it now? |
I don't think that the autoclean code in vartree.py should be disabled by default, since that really does have dangerous implications (old version is not uninstalled during upgrade). For the purposes of this PR, I think it would make sense to introduce a separate GLOBAL_AUTOCLEAN variable which only affects the global autoclean action that you are trying to optimize. |
|
I'm wondering if instead we should just unconditionally autoclean for that case? |
|
Sure, unconditional autoclean in vartree.py seems reasonable. The AUTOCLEAN=n case there really doesn't seem worth supporting. |
thesamesam
force-pushed
the
autoclean
branch
2 times, most recently
from
fc650b7
to
344fed7
Compare
Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/792195 Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
|
|
||
| others_in_slot.append(self) # self has just been merged | ||
| for dblnk in list(others_in_slot): | ||
| if dblnk is self: | ||
| continue | ||
| if not (autoclean or dblnk.mycpv == self.mycpv or reinstall_self): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When changing to just:
if not (dblnk.mycpv == self.mycpv or reinstall_self):
this broke the lib/portage/tests/emerge/test_emerge_slot_abi.py test, presumably because something overlapping was left, and normally we were testing with autoclean on.
It passes with removing the condition entirely which I think is what we've agreed?
I've talked myself into circles on whether it's right to drop it or whether the test is the problem, or something else. I think it seems right to drop it: we always want to clean up after ourselves, just not consider all other packages.
@zmedico let me know if I should somehow adapt the test (and how?) if I haven't made the right fix here. It seems right to me to just always autoclean here though like we discussed but I might be missing something (it feels wrong the test broke in the AUTOCLEAN=no case?)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Right, we always want to cleanup after ourselves. The rest of this condition was for the "autoclean is False" case, which no longer exists, so the whole condition is unnecessary now.
|
Thanks for all the help Zac, really appreciated! |
Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/792195