Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists. c.f. bug 424647
On Tue, 26 Apr 2011 19:28:39 +0200
Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote:
> It's not quite clear what a "block on an ebuild" is, so let's clarify
> the wording such that it agrees with portage behaviour.
>
> Portage ignores self-blockers both in DEPEND and RDEPEND.
Even strong blockers?
Also, what happens for packages that can't be rebuilt once they're
installed (e.g. because they screw up and use stuff on / if it's there)?
We've got this weird situation where DEPEND=!!self would prevent you
from upgrading or downgrading, but wouldn't stop you from rebuilding
the exact same version. That doesn't seem right.
It seems weird that we're mandating that a package manager should just
outright ignore bits of dependency variables. Maybe it would be better
to mark it as undefined as to whether or not the package manager
honours such a block (and tell people not to do it), and then for the
next EAPI figure out the logical meaning and specify that?
--
Ciaran McCreesh
|
|
