Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Pacho Ramos <pacho@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] About what would be included in EAPI5
Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2012 15:21:33
Message-Id: 1339860029.7815.30.camel@belkin4
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] About what would be included in EAPI5 by Pacho Ramos
1 El sáb, 16-06-2012 a las 17:16 +0200, Pacho Ramos escribió:
2 > El sáb, 16-06-2012 a las 15:52 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh escribió:
3 > > On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 16:48:20 +0200
4 > > Pacho Ramos <pacho@g.o> wrote:
5 > > > Regarding the comparison with using only SLOT, the most clear example
6 > > > of how that solution was a bit worse was that glib vs
7 > > > dbus-glib/gobject-introspection handling:
8 > > > - Using only SLOT with := would end up with we needing to update
9 > > > ebuilds for packages depending on glib on each SLOT bump, that is
10 > > > completely inviable.
11 > >
12 > > What about if ranged dependencies existed?
13 >
14 > I think this was already discussed in the same thread, but maybe we are
15 > thinking in different things, could you please explain me a bit more
16 > what do you mean by "ranged dependencies"? (if it would include an
17 > example, even better :))
18 >
19 > >
20 > > Also, we've yet to establish whether SLOT-with-/ really solves this
21 > > problem, nor whether the problem is a general one. How many packages
22 > > are there with stable APIs but unstable ABIs?
23 > >
24 >
25 > Good point, if other maintainers don't talk about their packages (as
26 > they will for sure know why they need rebuilding exactly), would need to
27 > grep in the tree looking for rebuild instructions for figure out :/, I
28 > can try to check it if no maintainer shows more packages showing this
29 > stable API unstable ABIs issues
30 >
31
32 Also, maybe you could talk with other exherbo maintainers as I am sure
33 they have also experienced this kind of problem (packages needing to be
34 rebuilt after update of other one), maybe they could join forces with us
35 to try to reach an exact description of the problem and a solution :/
36
37 > > > - I suggested then to be able to make that packages depend on :* (for
38 > > > example, dev-libs/glib:2.*:=, that way, that packages wouldn't need to
39 > > > get their ebuilds updated as they would still fit inside "2.*" case,
40 > > > but would still get rebuild (as wanted) due := usage... but you also
41 > > > didn't like this approach.
42 > >
43 > > You're misunderstanding the point of the * there. The * has nothing to
44 > > do with wildcarding.
45 >
46 > Probably, what is "*" sense in this context? I was thinking more on a
47 > bash context when I would use "*" to fit any 2.x case
48 >
49 > >
50 > > > > > About what I am trying to solve, I have explained it multiple
51 > > > > > times in involved thread and won't repeat them once again.
52 > > > >
53 > > > > Describing the problem clearly and correctly, and in the appropriate
54 > > > > amount of generality, is the hardest and most important part of the
55 > > > > process. Figuring out what we're trying to solve is far harder than
56 > > > > writing a bit of code.
57 > > >
58 > > > What I try to do is to replace the needing of manually rebuilding
59 > > > packages after updates due ABI changes, like currently occurs with
60 > > > xorg drivers, g-i and dbus-glib, ocaml-c based apps and cases like
61 > > > that.
62 > >
63 > > See, that's not really a description of the problem. It's a good start,
64 > > but I'd expect a full description to run to be several pages of
65 > > detailed description of the general case, along with worked out
66 > > examples. This isn't an easy issue, and we don't want to come up with a
67 > > solution that works for one particular package whilst ignoring the
68 > > needs of everything else.
69 > >
70 > > > Regarding other problems like needing to use perl-cleaner,
71 > > > python-updater looks to be covered by another approach of "dynamic
72 > > > slots" I have just seen in gentoo-dev IRC channel by mgorny, then,
73 > > > that kind of issues would be uncovered with this (but maybe I am
74 > > > wrong as I know Zac had a more clear conception about how this
75 > > > ABI_SLOT way would work and what would it cover)
76 > >
77 > > Somehow I don't think this cunning plan has been thought all the way
78 > > through...
79 > >
80 > > Coming up with a "solution" rather than a description of the problem is
81 > > the wrong thing to do.
82 > >
83 >
84 >

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature