1 |
On 04/23/2011 03:28 AM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote: |
2 |
> Eray Aslan schrieb: |
3 |
>> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=364445 |
4 |
>> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=364401 |
5 |
>> |
6 |
>> Basically, there are requests to add packages to RDEPEND in virtual/mda |
7 |
>> and virtual/mta that are not in the official tree but in sunrise. |
8 |
>> |
9 |
>> On one side, *DEPENDing on a package outside the tree doesn't seem |
10 |
>> right. |
11 |
> |
12 |
> I understand that the push to remove old-style virtuals from the main |
13 |
> tree is because they cause headaches for the package managers during |
14 |
> dependency calculation. I also understand that existing EAPIs will not |
15 |
> be amended to forbid old-style virtuals. |
16 |
> |
17 |
> Would it make sense to do the following: |
18 |
> (1) make all new-style virtuals additionally depend on an old-style |
19 |
> virtual (a new category might be appropriate) |
20 |
> (2) ebuilds in overlays can PROVIDE the old-style virtual |
21 |
|
22 |
It seems like new-style virtual would be introducing complexity without |
23 |
adding any value here. Why not just use a pure old-style virtual? |
24 |
|
25 |
> (3) in a future EAPI, package managers are allowed to ignore the |
26 |
> old-style virtual dependency for packages which are not already installed |
27 |
|
28 |
I'm not sure what you mean here. In || dependencies, it's normal to |
29 |
ignore choices that are masked or unavailable, so I'm not sure that |
30 |
you're suggesting anything different from the existing || behavior. |
31 |
|
32 |
> If directly including installed old-style virtual packages in the |
33 |
> dependency calculations is not feasible, (3) could be implemented |
34 |
> through modifying package.provided like it is already done for |
35 |
> package.{keywords,mask,use} after profile/ updates |
36 |
|
37 |
Again, I'm not sure that I understand the point of this. Since || |
38 |
dependencies already ignore unavailable or masked choices, why would |
39 |
package.provided be needed? |
40 |
-- |
41 |
Thanks, |
42 |
Zac |