| 1 |
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 02:53:23PM -0400, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote: |
| 2 |
> > Wouldn't disabling the use of binary packages during the seed stage |
| 3 |
> > update fix this? |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> I'm not sure I'd call rebuilding it every time a "fix" when you just |
| 7 |
> rejected deleting the bad packages and rebuilding ONCE. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> As I said, the only proper fix is to update the toolchain to EAPI5. We |
| 10 |
> could live in the dark ages forever, but I really don't think it helps |
| 11 |
> anyone. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
I'd be quite happy to have to toolchain move to EAPI5. I suspect we |
| 14 |
need an interim solution until that happens ;). |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
I also don't think EAPI5 sub-slots fix this problem, since GCC |
| 17 |
wouldn't RDEPEND on a particular sub-slot of mpc, even if both |
| 18 |
packages used EAPI5. RDEPEND describes potential source |
| 19 |
compatability, but we need to record the actual ABI linkage (which is |
| 20 |
a subset of the source compatability). |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Cheers, |
| 23 |
Trevor |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
This email may be signed or encrypted with GnuPG (http://www.gnupg.org). |
| 27 |
For more information, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy |
Archives