Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Thoughts about broken package handling
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 06:21:01
Message-Id: 20110628071752.170b0419@googlemail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Thoughts about broken package handling by Kent Fredric
1 On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 16:54:43 +1200
2 Kent Fredric <kentfredric@×××××.com> wrote:
3 > Reminds me of the other awkward behaviour I once hit where a package
4 > depends on something that is slotted, and mysteriously uses a middle
5 > version of the things that are slotted, and then breaks with that
6 > version that it for some mysterious reason found a preference for, and
7 > upon removing that particular version of the slot, it uses the most
8 > recent slotted version instead, and then works perfectly.
9
10 There was going to be a really simple, elegant, ebuild-controllable and
11 provably working fix for that in EAPI 4 in the form of := deps, but
12 they got dropped because Portage couldn't implement it.
13
14 Which is strange, because it should have been a ten minute job...
15
16 --
17 Ciaran McCreesh

Attachments

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

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Thoughts about broken package handling Peter Volkov <pva@g.o>