El sáb, 16-06-2012 a las 17:46 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh escribió:
> On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 18:41:51 +0200
> Pacho Ramos <pacho@g.o> 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
> laziness.
> 
> > > 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.
> 

Well, not all people have infinite time to put that huge effort you
sometimes would demand us to make things work perfectly :| (and looks
like Exherbo developer also have the same problem as this model is still
not implemented there, no? And that is normal, they also have time
constraints for sure)