1 |
I occasionally run across a package version dependency issue that cannot |
2 |
be elegantly solved by the current dependency syntax. Every time I've |
3 |
come across this, it's boiled down to a range. For example, package |
4 |
some-cat/foo has the following versions in the tree |
5 |
some-cat/foo-4.0.0-r2 |
6 |
some-cat/foo-4.1 |
7 |
some-cat/foo-4.1.1 |
8 |
some-cat/foo-4.1.2-r2 |
9 |
some-cat/foo-4.2.1-r5 |
10 |
some-cat/foo-4.3 |
11 |
some-cat/foo-4.4 |
12 |
|
13 |
Now, package other-cat/bar has a runtime dependency on some-cat/foo but |
14 |
it only works with the 4.1 and 4.2 slot. The other-cat/bar ebuild was |
15 |
originally composed before the some-cat/foo-4.3 package came out, so the |
16 |
ebuild developer coded the runtime dependency as |
17 |
>=some-cat/foo-4.1 |
18 |
|
19 |
But, when some-cat/foo-4.3 came along, it got messy. The only possible |
20 |
solution today that I know of is |
21 |
( || =some-cat/foo-4.1* =some-cat/foo-4.2* ) |
22 |
and this potentially grows over time as new versions stabilize. |
23 |
|
24 |
What I'd really like to be able to code is a range with an AND operator, |
25 |
something like this |
26 |
( && >=some-cat/foo-4.0 <some-cat/foo-4.3 ) |
27 |
|
28 |
So, my question is, does this make sense? Is something like this |
29 |
planned for some EAPI>0? Would it be appropriate for me (a non-dev) to |
30 |
file a bug and link it to SpanKy's "EAPI-1 tracker" bug? |
31 |
|
32 |
|
33 |
Thanks in advance. |
34 |
|
35 |
- John |
36 |
-- |
37 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |