On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 18:41:51 +0200
Pacho Ramos <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > The :*/:= feature was designed to solve one specific problem: if a
> > user has foo installed, and foo deps upon bar, and bar:1 is
> > installed, and the user wants to install bar:2 and then uninstall
> > bar:1, will foo break? :* means no, := means yes.
> And, wouldn't it be covered simply making that package not depend on
> any slot specifically?
Some people use "no slot" to mean "and it's fixed at build time", and
some use it to mean "and I don't care". We *could* just omit :*, and
use := for locking, but an explicit :* means someone has checked their
work (and can be verified by repoman) whereas no slot probably means
> > I'm pretty sure the route Exherbo is going to take with this is very
> > different, and will involve souped-up USE flags that allow "parts"
> > of a package (such as its libraries) to be kept around, possibly
> > together with a special form of blocker that acts only upon
> > installed packages, with a strict post ordering. It's not going to
> > involve sub-slots, in any case.
> Well, probably the problem is to predict when will that be really
> solved there :(
Naah. This is one of those things that requires developers to put quite
a lot of exta effort in to their packages in order to improve the
quality of experience for users, which means it's not going to be
suitable for Gentoo's development model.