| 1 |
Dnia 2014-07-26, o godz. 14:02:29 |
| 2 |
Martin Vaeth <martin@×××××.de> napisał(a): |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Alexandre Rostovtsev <tetromino@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > rdepends-add is easy to implement [...] Deletion is trickier [...] |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> > The point is to *not* clean up these entries for months/years. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> So, essentially, you want the developer to do part of CVS/git's job, |
| 11 |
> namely keeping a history of changes in a compressed format, |
| 12 |
> keeping the history forever (or almost forever). |
| 13 |
> As mentioned in another post, you highly understimate the |
| 14 |
> amount of data which would have to be treated this way: |
| 15 |
> For every python release and many other eclass changes, |
| 16 |
> almost all packages in the tree are involved, usually |
| 17 |
> several times a months. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Python is irrelevant here. Our dependencies are USE-conditional, so |
| 20 |
dependencies are added and removed along with USE flags. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
If we add new implementation, you need to rebuild the package anyway to |
| 23 |
use it, and there is no point populating extra dependencies. Revbump |
| 24 |
isn't necessary either since --changed-use will pick it up if necessary. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
If we remove an implementation, PM isn't supposed to remove |
| 27 |
the dependencies until the package is rebuilt with flag disabled. If it |
| 28 |
was enabled, --changed-use is supposed to clean it up. If it was not, |
| 29 |
the extra dependencies do not matter (and are not even stored in vdb). |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
Best regards, |
| 33 |
Michał Górny |
Archives