Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ian Stakenvicius <axs@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] About forcing rebuilds of other packages issue
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2012 19:32:38
Message-Id: 4FD2530C.5080906@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] About forcing rebuilds of other packages issue by Pacho Ramos
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 08/06/12 03:23 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> El vie, 08-06-2012 a las 12:16 -0700, Zac Medico escribió: >> It's close enough to ABI_SLOT that it would make more sense just >> to use ABI_SLOT because it's more flexible. > > In that case, I think it's clear we need ABI_SLOT ;) The problem is > how to document it in a way people agree with including it for > eapi5 :|
If there's too much resistance it could wait for EAPI=6 couldn't it? Essentially we'd all just agree that these issues, which ABI_SLOT will be needed to effectively resolve, will have to wait and we shouldn't do vast tree-wide workarounds like SLOT every library in existence and require all consumers to have ':=' slot operators on their deps. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAk/SUwwACgkQ2ugaI38ACPCWtQEArkrEsVYa7/tJ8UT1pDBhDhsJ +jdMEsbJa++3bWat9TUA/1YoEaOp3cGShNDraFv+cLQl2Qf+hpz3K1AasJVstQwa =Nqw/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----