Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Cc: ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in net-im/qutecom: metadata.xml ChangeLog qutecom-2.2_p20110210.ebuild
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 15:33:26
Message-Id: CAGfcS_mGoeHaV4Q2390m+XmXhifg+DDk9SroGf9KASRqJnhcGA@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in net-im/qutecom: metadata.xml ChangeLog qutecom-2.2_p20110210.ebuild by "Michał Górny"
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 11:26 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote:
> So, in your opinion, if we have 'foo' and 'libfoo' which are strictly > version-bound, we can't allow users to install older versions?
Obviously the real issue is when libfoo is libpng or openssl or whatever. It almost makes you wonder if the solution is to do a LOT more slotting. Maybe with the right automation slotting could be less painful to maintain. Of course, if you take that to the ultimate extreme you'd just have every package install each file with a hash in the filename and then have /usr/bin et all be a collection of symlinks. And before you know it you're running Plan9. :) Rich