List Archive: gentoo-dev
Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.c.f. bug 424647
Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Re: Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in net-im/qutecom: metadata.xml ChangeLog qutecom-2.2_p20110210.ebuild
Mon, 03 Oct 2011 00:31:32 +0200
Samuli Suominen schrieb:
>>> Poor example to make a case.
>> VIDEO_CARDS is just for user convenience. run "emerge nvidia-drivers" on
>> any system with xorg-server-1.11 installed and it will downgrade, no
>> matter what VIDEO_CARDS is set to.
> And your point is?
My point is that packages can cause downgrades through "<" dependencies.
There is no rule against it.
Maybe going through upgrade/downgrade cycles is inconvenient for some
users, or downgrades affect a package that you are particularly
interested in. That still doesn't make it justified to remove a package
against the maintainer's wishes. And certainly not to remove it twice
cutting short the required treecleaning process, the second time _after_
I have stated to be willing to fix the bug and challenging you to point
out the authoritative documentation my ebuild was in violation of.
>> And the wording clearly does only apply to package removals.
> The fact that the *common sense* snippet was inserted in this document,
> but isn't documented else where... doesn't make it any less true.
It may be obvious to you, but it certainly is not obvious to me why
linux-headers downgrade is so bad. If vapier's unsupported out-of-tree
software fails to build against old linux-headers, then he has to make
sure to have the correct version installed before proceeding. Blaming
that on qutecom is far-fetched IMO.
Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn