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: Pacho Ramos <pacho@g.o>
Subject: Re: About what would be included in EAPI5
Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2012 20:59:18 +0200
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)
Attachment:
signature.asc (This is a digitally signed message part)
Replies:
Re: About what would be included in EAPI5
-- Ciaran McCreesh
References:
About what would be included in EAPI5
-- Pacho Ramos
Re: About what would be included in EAPI5
-- Ulrich Mueller
Re: About what would be included in EAPI5
-- Pacho Ramos
Re: About what would be included in EAPI5
-- Ciaran McCreesh
Re: About what would be included in EAPI5
-- Pacho Ramos
Re: About what would be included in EAPI5
-- Ciaran McCreesh
Re: About what would be included in EAPI5
-- Pacho Ramos
Re: About what would be included in EAPI5
-- Ciaran McCreesh
Re: About what would be included in EAPI5
-- Pacho Ramos
Re: About what would be included in EAPI5
-- Pacho Ramos
Re: About what would be included in EAPI5
-- Ciaran McCreesh
Re: About what would be included in EAPI5
-- Pacho Ramos
Re: About what would be included in EAPI5
-- Ciaran McCreesh
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
Re: About what would be included in EAPI5
Next by thread:
Re: About what would be included in EAPI5
Previous by date:
Re: About using USE flags to pull in needed RDEPENDs being discouraged by devmanual
Next by date:
Re: About what would be included in EAPI5


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.