| 1 |
hasufell <hasufell@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> Dynamics deps are already broken, not consistently enabled (e.g. when |
| 4 |
> subslots are in use) |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Just to make it clear: No, dynamic deps are not broken. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
What is broken is that portage does not use them consistently. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
It would be a rather bad idea to change policy just because of this |
| 11 |
portage bug and force users to permanently do unnecessary |
| 12 |
recompilations. At least, for me, it would mean that I have |
| 13 |
to change distribution, since I cannot afford this. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
> optional and not defined in PMS. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Static deps are also optional and not defined in PMS. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
In fact, PMS makes no claim *where* to read the DEP strings from; |
| 20 |
it only specified how they are to be stored in the tree. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Quite the opposite, PMS claims that one cannot rely on |
| 23 |
anything stored in /var/db |
Archives