| 1 |
Am Sonntag, 2. März 2014, 16:45:03 schrieb Jeroen Roovers: |
| 2 |
> On Sun, 2 Mar 2014 09:37:22 +0100 |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
> > Few months ago I have written a small FAQ on how to use slots |
| 6 |
> > and subslots for library dependencies properly [1]. However, today |
| 7 |
> > I see that most of the developers didn't care to properly update their |
| 8 |
> > packages and when I introduced binary compatibility slot in libgcrypt, |
| 9 |
> > I had my hands full of work fixing the mess for a single package. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> How about you file a tracker bug report for each library package, and |
| 12 |
> then file bug reports per package using that dependency blocking the |
| 13 |
> tracker bug? |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
I see your point. However please read this beautiful document for the ensuing |
| 16 |
mess (where things were done accordingly): |
| 17 |
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=455900 |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
[For the record, upstream ICU devs recommend to rebuild reverse dependencies |
| 20 |
even after patch release updates to ensure stability. This was discussed on |
| 21 |
their mailing list some time ago. I'm not going to comment on whether that is |
| 22 |
sane or not, but we have to work with it. Now what do you prefer, randomly |
| 23 |
crashing packages or an additional rebuild?] |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
Andreas K. Huettel |
| 27 |
Gentoo Linux developer (council, kde) |
| 28 |
dilfridge@g.o |
| 29 |
http://www.akhuettel.de/ |
Archives