| 1 |
Neil Bothwick escribió: |
| 2 |
> On Mon, 06 Aug 2007 10:45:25 +0200, Abraham Marín Pérez wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> Now think there's a new version available of LIB, let's say version |
| 6 |
>> 2.1, but the latest version of APP is still 1.0. If portage performed a |
| 7 |
>> deep update by default LIB would be rebuilt, but no APP, what would |
| 8 |
>> cause broken dependencies on APP (remember LIB is a dynamic library). |
| 9 |
>> However, is you don't update LIB unless you update also APP you will |
| 10 |
>> prevent this problem*. |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> SLOTs deal with this problem, allowing you to have LIB-1.0 and LIB-2.0 |
| 14 |
> installed simultaneously. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
I'm afraid you misunderstood what I said. As you said, slots let |
| 18 |
different versions of the same package being installed in your system, |
| 19 |
however, that's only done when you REALLY need to do so; one of the |
| 20 |
cases in which you would have such a necessity is the one of a library |
| 21 |
which changes its API through versions in a way that breaks backwards |
| 22 |
compatibility. In this case you may have apps using the old API and apps |
| 23 |
using the new one, and hence you would need both versions installed. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
However, if you can go with only one version slots aren't used, can you |
| 26 |
imagine the great amount of garbage installed in your box if you had to |
| 27 |
use a new slot for every new version of a package? That's just crazy. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
In conclusion, if you update a library and uninstall its previous |
| 30 |
version (which you'd do very often, even if you haven't noticed it |
| 31 |
before) you may need to rebuild the apps using that library as well, |
| 32 |
there's no way you escape from that. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Abraham |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives