| 1 |
Nirbheek Chauhan <nirbheek@g.o> posted |
| 2 |
8b4c83ad0904091106w1dd21b30v8d98c528d02def3a@××××××××××.com, excerpted |
| 3 |
below, on Thu, 09 Apr 2009 23:36:16 +0530: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
> On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 10:15 PM, Tiziano Müller <dev-zero@g.o> |
| 6 |
> wrote: |
| 7 |
>> roughly 90% packages depending on one of: |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> sys-libs/db |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> Why the hell does this have so many slots in-tree? I am unaware of the |
| 12 |
> reasons for it. Horribly changed API every release? How does every other |
| 13 |
> distro handle sys-libs/db ? |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Yes, they specifically don't maintain API thru minor version numbers (tho |
| 16 |
AFAIK they do for micro, third field). |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Most other distributions are binary and release only periodically, not |
| 19 |
the "rolling update" Gentoo does, so they can declare a target db version |
| 20 |
for a release and build everything to it. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
>> Besides: We wouldn't need the need_python_rebuild anymore, users could |
| 23 |
>> safely uninstall old sys-libs/db versions, old dev-libs/boost versions |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> @preserved-libs. More generic, a low-level catch-all for library |
| 26 |
> breakages, and more convenient for users (rebuild as and when possible, |
| 27 |
> not *right now* lest everything break). |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Honestly I'm wondering if that's going to end up a "failed experiment" |
| 30 |
much like confcache. Many of us users anyway running portage 2.2 turned |
| 31 |
off that feature right away, as it was breaking more stuff than it fixed. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
OTOH, since I turned it off as too much trouble for the small gain, I've |
| 34 |
not been tracking it so closely. Maybe the bugs are all pretty much |
| 35 |
resolved... |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
But it's not something I expect to be turning on again right away. Once |
| 38 |
burned twice shy, and all that... tho I admit I'd value it much higher |
| 39 |
if my system was on the slow side instead of the fast side. And as a |
| 40 |
~arch user that often answers questions stable users have that I dealt |
| 41 |
with six months or whatever ago, I'm not especially optimistic that /I'm/ |
| 42 |
not going to be seeing bugs based on it. That being the case, I can only |
| 43 |
imagine the headache it would threaten were I a bug wrangler or package |
| 44 |
maintainer actually having to deal with those bugzilla entries. Like I |
| 45 |
said, I have visions of confcache just thinking about it. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
-- |
| 48 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
| 49 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
| 50 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |
Archives