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: Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in net-im/qutecom: metadata.xml ChangeLog qutecom-2.2_p20110210.ebuild
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 14:20:46 -0400
On Sunday, October 02, 2011 08:58:19 Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
> Samuli Suominen schrieb:
> >> Please point to existing authoritative documentation which says that
> >> downgrades are unacceptable.
> >> 
> >>> It is NOT gentoo-x86 compatible package in it's current form.
> >> 
> >> It sets correct dependency on an existing ebuild in tree. The dependency
> >> is only build time, users can upgrade linux-headers again afterwards.
> >> The application itself is v4l2 compatible.
> > 
> > common sense...
> > 
> > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=311241#c2
> > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=311241#c5
> 
> linux-headers is not a library, it is strictly a build time dependency
> for all packages which I am aware of.

forcing downgrades of random packages is extremely poor behavior.  it doesn't 
matter if it's DEPEND or RDEPEND behavior.  if your one package is the last 
thing to get installed, then you leave the system in a poor state.

further, when the newer version gets stabilized and then the older ones 
dropped, what then ?  your package is broken.

> > The time ran out with opening of http://bugs.gentoo.org/384733 for
> > linux-headers reverse deps to be tracked stable.
> > 
> > I've removed qutecom for you again.
> 
> Please put it back in tree. You have my consent to remove it on 13
> October (when the 30 days are over) and I have not fixed it yet.

skipping 30 days is a bit premature, but re-adding it at this point doesn't 
make sense.  fix it and re-add it, or don't re-add it at all.
-mike
Attachment:
signature.asc (This is a digitally signed message part.)
Replies:
Re: Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in net-im/qutecom: metadata.xml ChangeLog qutecom-2.2_p20110210.ebuild
-- Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
References:
Re: Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in net-im/qutecom: metadata.xml ChangeLog qutecom-2.2_p20110210.ebuild
-- Samuli Suominen
Re: Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in net-im/qutecom: metadata.xml ChangeLog qutecom-2.2_p20110210.ebuild
-- Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
Re: Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in net-im/qutecom: metadata.xml ChangeLog qutecom-2.2_p20110210.ebuild
Next by thread:
Re: Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in net-im/qutecom: metadata.xml ChangeLog qutecom-2.2_p20110210.ebuild
Previous by date:
Re: FEATURES="stricter" as a default in developer profile not the best idea
Next by date:
Re: Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in net-im/qutecom: metadata.xml ChangeLog qutecom-2.2_p20110210.ebuild


Updated Jun 29, 2012

Summary: Archive of the gentoo-dev mailing list.

Donate to support our development efforts.

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