Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "Michał Górny" <mgorny@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Cc: ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: PROPERTIES=funky-slots
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2012 18:37:14
Message-Id: 20120623203700.3c3fe2a0@pomiocik.lan
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: PROPERTIES=funky-slots by Ciaran McCreesh
1 On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 19:22:37 +0100
2 Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com> wrote:
3
4 > On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 20:23:13 +0200
5 > Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote:
6 > > On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 19:06:38 +0100
7 > > Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com> wrote:
8 > > > On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 20:09:03 +0200
9 > > > Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote:
10 > > > > > That's just it, though -- this no longer holds. -r300 is now
11 > > > > > being used for something that is exactly the same version as
12 > > > > > -r200.
13 > > > >
14 > > > > Did you look at SONAME?
15 > > >
16 > > > Look at SONAME before deciding what package to install? Kindly
17 > > > explain how that works.
18 > >
19 > > I'm just saying that these are two different versions of the
20 > > package. If you want GTK+3, you take the newer one. If you want
21 > > GTK+2 compat, you take the older slot. What's wrong with that?
22 >
23 > The package mangler does not know that 1.1-r300 is not a "better"
24 > version than 1.1-r200, or that 1.2-r200 is not a "better" version than
25 > 1.1-r300. Indicating packages where this kind of strangeness happens
26 > allows manglers to know that things that are usually true about the
27 > relationship between slots and versions no longer hold, and that in
28 > these specific cases it should consider slots to be heavily
29 > independent.
30
31 It *is* a 'better' version, much like gtk+-3.* is 'better' than
32 gtk+-2.*.
33
34 --
35 Best regards,
36 Michał Górny

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature