Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship




Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date. GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.
c.f. bug 424647
List Archive: gentoo-dev
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Headers:
To: gentoo-dev@g.o
From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o>
Subject: Re: RFC about another *DEPEND variable
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 11:01:40 -0400
On Thursday 21 September 2006 10:54, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Yes, I agree with you. For example, take expat. The maintainers have
> refused to allow both versions to exist simultaneously on a system
> because it apparently causes more breakage than just breaking every app
> on your system by removing .so.0.

that is the exact case portage should be handling for you

it would go "oh hey, check out libexpat.so.0 ... some things seem to want 
it ... HEY USER, you need to rebuild: xxxxxxxx" ... once all the packages 
still consuming libexpat.so.0 are rebuilt, portage could silently trim it 
from the system

complicated ?  not really, scanelf can produce all this information in an 
easily digestable format
-mike
Attachment:
pgpcRuqBNRQSy.pgp (PGP signature)
Replies:
Re: RFC about another *DEPEND variable
-- Ciaran McCreesh
References:
RFC about another *DEPEND variable
-- Alin Nastac
Re: RFC about another *DEPEND variable
-- Mike Frysinger
Re: RFC about another *DEPEND variable
-- Donnie Berkholz
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
Re: RFC about another *DEPEND variable
Next by thread:
Re: RFC about another *DEPEND variable
Previous by date:
Re: RFC about another *DEPEND variable
Next by date:
Re: Notification about MD5 support


Updated Oct 31, 2011

Summary: Archive of the gentoo-dev mailing list.

Donate to support our development efforts.

Copyright 2001-2013 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Contact us.