-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 07/06/12 03:00 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> El jue, 07-06-2012 a las 19:44 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh escribió:
>> On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 20:43:54 +0200 Pacho Ramos <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>>>> I would prefer, as a workaround, allow reverse deps to
>>>> RDEPEND on glib:2.* instead. That way it would cover more
>>>> cases when more than two slots are available
>>> Well, per:
looks like "*" usage for SLOTs would be allowed :), or I am
>>> misinterpreting it?
>> It's not a wildcard.
> But it looks like a valid usage for cases like glib vs.
> dbus-glib/gobject-introspection I have exposed as example, and
> also allows us to keep "SLOT" over "ABI_SLOT" (at least for this
> case, not sure about others I could be missing now...)
How is the case of something like libpng going to be handled, where we
only support one API (and so only one SLOT)? Either in the proposed
ABI_SLOT thing or when using slot operators?
For the slot-operator case, will every consumer of libpng be forced to
change their dep to libpng:= to ensure they get rebuilt when libpng
bumps from 1.5 to 1.6??
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----