Am Donnerstag, den 09.04.2009, 23:36 +0530 schrieb Nirbheek Chauhan:
> On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 10:15 PM, Tiziano Müller <dev-zero@g.o> wrote:
> > roughly 90% packages depending on one of:
> >
> > sys-libs/db
> 
> Why the hell does this have so many slots in-tree? I am unaware of the
> reasons for it. Horribly changed API every release? How does every
> other distro handle sys-libs/db ?
Doesn't matter in this context since somebody just wanted examples.

> 
> > dev-libs/boost
> 
> Has one unmasked slot in-tree
Oh, you got me. Nevertheless, will be 4 by the end of the week.

> 
> > dev-lang/python
> >
> 
> So, wait, you want to depend on specific slots of python and keep them
> around, and manage all their related bugs? Isn't that exactly the
> opposite of what python upstream suggests, and *ALL* distros do?
See dleverton's reply.

> 
> > Besides: We wouldn't need the need_python_rebuild anymore, users could
> > safely uninstall old sys-libs/db versions, old dev-libs/boost versions
> 
> @preserved-libs. More generic, a low-level catch-all for library
> breakages, and more convenient for users (rebuild as and when
> possible, not *right now* lest everything break).
> 
> > and the list of packages to reinstall in python-updater boils down to
> > what "paludis -u dev-lang/python:2.4" spits out as reverse-dependencies
> > (or the corresponding portage command).
> 
> You mean emerge -C dev-lang/python:2.4 ? That'll say "bai bai python".
> In any case, what is wrong with python_need_rebuild ?
> 
> Slot operators need changes to the ebuilds, so does python_need_rebuild.
> Slot operators need an EAPI bump for the ebuild, python_need_rebuild doesn't.
> 
> So, isn't python_need_rebuild superior.. ?
> 
No. Python rebuild makes explicit use of how vdb works. Which is not
specified by eapi and therefore not guaranteed to work.
But since you checked how things work before you start writing you
already know that, don't you?