Gentoo Archives: gentoo-pms

From: Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o>
To: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com>
Cc: gentoo-pms@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-pms] Clarify wording on self-blockers
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 18:19:34
Message-Id: 19895.3237.434300.678486@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-pms] Clarify wording on self-blockers by Ciaran McCreesh
1 >>>>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2011, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
2
3 >> Portage ignores self-blockers both in DEPEND and RDEPEND.
4
5 > Even strong blockers?
6
7 No, strongs blockers are honoured in this case. (Which is fine, since
8 the spec says "A strong block must not be ignored.")
9
10 Updated patch (I've added the word "weak") is included below.
11
12 > Also, what happens for packages that can't be rebuilt once they're
13 > installed (e.g. because they screw up and use stuff on / if it's
14 > there)?
15
16 Such packages should be fixed. But if someone really needs a DEPEND
17 blocker on the ebuild's version itself, he can use EAPI 2 or later and
18 a strong blocker.
19
20 > We've got this weird situation where DEPEND=!!self would prevent you
21 > from upgrading or downgrading, but wouldn't stop you from rebuilding
22 > the exact same version. That doesn't seem right.
23
24 > It seems weird that we're mandating that a package manager should
25 > just outright ignore bits of dependency variables. Maybe it would be
26 > better to mark it as undefined as to whether or not the package
27 > manager honours such a block (and tell people not to do it), and
28 > then for the next EAPI figure out the logical meaning and specify
29 > that?
30
31 I don't like adding such "undefined" bits in cases where portage
32 behaviour is well-defined.
33
34 Ulrich
35
36
37 From 5935aa87d46a97a72c8c032728f50a6ecbdf864d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
38 From: Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o>
39 Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 19:10:51 +0200
40 Subject: [PATCH] Clarify wording on self-blockers.
41
42 ---
43 dependencies.tex | 2 +-
44 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
45
46 diff --git a/dependencies.tex b/dependencies.tex
47 index 362f6cc..f6318d8 100644
48 --- a/dependencies.tex
49 +++ b/dependencies.tex
50 @@ -187,7 +187,7 @@ following exceptions:
51
52 \begin{compactitem}
53 \item Blocks on a package provided exclusively by the ebuild do not count. \label{provided-blocks}
54 -\item Blocks on the ebuild itself do not count.
55 +\item Weak blocks on the package version of the ebuild itself do not count.
56 \end{compactitem}
57
58 \featurelabel{bang-strength} There are two strengths of block: weak and strong. A weak block may be
59 --
60 1.7.5.rc1

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-pms] Clarify wording on self-blockers Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com>