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: Sun, 10 Jun 2012 13:08:16
Message-Id: 4FD49BF6.2010207@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] About forcing rebuilds of other packages issue by Davide Pesavento
1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
2 Hash: SHA256
3
4 On 10/06/12 08:45 AM, Davide Pesavento wrote:
5 > On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 2:25 PM, Ciaran McCreesh
6 > <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com> wrote:
7 >> On Sat, 09 Jun 2012 13:55:53 -0700 Zac Medico
8 >> <zmedico@g.o> wrote:
9 >>> A dependency atom will have optional SLOT and ABI_SLOT parts.
10 >>> Using the dbus-glib depedency on glib:2 as an example [1], the
11 >>> dbus-glib dependency will be expressed with an atom such as
12 >>> dev-libs/glib:2:= and the package manager will translate that
13 >>> atom to dev-libs/glib:2:=2.32 at build time. So, ':' is always
14 >>> used to distinguish SLOT deps, and ':=' is always used to
15 >>> distinguish ABI_SLOT deps. Is that syntax good?
16 >>
17 >> Here's a nicer syntax: no ABI_SLOT variable, and SLOT="2/2.32".
18 >> Then you can do explicit :2/2.32 dependencies if you like, or :2
19 >> (which would match SLOT="2" or SLOT="2/anything"), or :2= (which
20 >> gets rewritten to :2/2.32=) or :2*. If an ebuild does SLOT="2",
21 >> it's treated as 2/2.
22 >>
23 >
24 > I was going to propose a very similar syntax, i.e. using a slash
25 > to separate the regular SLOT part from the new ABI part, so +1 for
26 > Ciaran's proposal.
27 >
28 > Thanks, Pesa
29 >
30
31 This looks very promising -- then for libs where we only want to
32 support one API, we could still use SLOT=0 via (ie for libpng)
33 SLOT="0/1.5"
34
35 +1
36
37 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
38 Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux)
39
40 iF4EAREIAAYFAk/Um/YACgkQ2ugaI38ACPDuDwD9F0mLVsh1rwUufL2HCB0Jjl2b
41 KkNa5z9I4s6lDQmPdIoBAKlPBrtN4C87qFjeJRBkytJvRn8ZF82kSQ0R7ik3UPqc
42 =EYRI
43 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----