1 |
On pon, 2017-04-10 at 16:40 -0400, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: |
2 |
> On Tue, 11 Apr 2017 03:29:25 +0700 |
3 |
> "Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov" <gentoo@×××.name> wrote: |
4 |
> |
5 |
> > Am I right in assumption that you arguing about *_TARGETS rework to |
6 |
> > be enabled by default for packages that was not tested on this |
7 |
> > TARGETs with ... hardness of packaging java software?.. |
8 |
> |
9 |
> I think TARGETS should not exist. They do not for Java, Perl, or PHP. |
10 |
|
11 |
I'm sorry but do you even use Gentoo, these days? Like the real Gentoo, |
12 |
not just some little part you've installed years ago and then modified |
13 |
only Java stuff in it? |
14 |
|
15 |
Perl does not use TARGETS. It uses subslots, after it used horrible |
16 |
custom rebuild tool. The latter brought many bug reports of users being |
17 |
hit by random breakage on upgrades, the former just brings *tons* of |
18 |
problems with Portage not being able to deal with Perl upgrades. |
19 |
|
20 |
PHP *uses* PHP_TARGETS. |
21 |
|
22 |
Python used not to use TARGETS. The results were random |
23 |
incompatibilities between packages that were hard to track and random |
24 |
breakage. Now we're past that. But I can understand it's not the Gentoo |
25 |
of your times where user was expected to watch his every step to have |
26 |
his system boot again. |
27 |
|
28 |
-- |
29 |
Best regards, |
30 |
Michał Górny |