1 |
On Saturday 23 September 2006 09:14, Brian Harring wrote: |
2 |
> You're assuming that after the merge of the pkg that breaks |
3 |
> compatibility, building is actually _still_ possible for the depends. |
4 |
|
5 |
of course i am; i just said that portage would make sure to not unmerge any |
6 |
ABI lib still in use |
7 |
|
8 |
> We don't classify our deps as actual build depends vs link depends; as |
9 |
> such trying to (essentially) "patch things up after" allow for the |
10 |
> scenario where merging breaks the toolchain, thus building isn't |
11 |
> possible. |
12 |
|
13 |
huh ? RDEPEND is linktime ... see my statement above |
14 |
|
15 |
> > - once all the packages requested have been merged, you start the second |
16 |
> > phase and calculate everything that needs to be rebuilt. as ABI libs are |
17 |
> > no longer needed on a system, portage can scrub them out |
18 |
> |
19 |
> "as ABI libs are no longer needed on a system", phrasing of that |
20 |
> implies you're suggesting that portage should leave the older package |
21 |
> in place till it's updated all revdeps, then wipe it. |
22 |
|
23 |
no i am not; read my previous e-mails where i said it would leave behind the 1 |
24 |
ABI lib required ... aka whatever is encoded in SONAME |
25 |
-mike |