| 1 |
* Michał Górny schrieb am 19.01.19 um 17:25 Uhr: |
| 2 |
> On Sat, 2019-01-19 at 17:37 +0300, Andrew Savchenko wrote: |
| 3 |
> > I do not like the idea. Slots are very elegant and effective |
| 4 |
> > mechanism and is one of the points where Gentoo outruns other |
| 5 |
> > distributions. Proposed approach with compat packages will |
| 6 |
> > effectively disable slots for most cases. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> You haven't brought a single argument as to how slots are better than |
| 9 |
> compat packages. In fact, it's not even clear if you're talking about |
| 10 |
> the same use of slots that I am. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
One was, that you have one package (ebuild directory) for each piece of |
| 13 |
software. Unlike other distributions which have lots of different |
| 14 |
packages all for the same source an many cases. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
So I'd agree that its the more gentooish way to have it all in one |
| 17 |
ebuild directory. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
That having said I agree that current use of compat slots might be |
| 20 |
somewhat confusing even to developers. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
So why not improve usability here? |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
I think it would increase the understanding of compat slots if we |
| 25 |
changed the naming of thoss slots. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
How about this: |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
dev-libs/openssl |
| 30 |
(0.9.8-compat) 0.9.8u 0.9.8v 0.9.8w 0.9.8x ~0.9.8y 0.9.8z_p8-r1 |
| 31 |
(0) 1.0.0h 1.0.0i […] [M]~1.1.1a [M]~1.1.1a-r1 |
| 32 |
(1.0.0-compat) ~1.0.2q-r200 |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
I can imagine that this might improve the situation a lot. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
Of cource thet woult still be the job to fix ebuilds where dependencies |
| 38 |
are wrong. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
-Marc |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
-- |
| 43 |
0xCA3E7BF67F979BE5 - F7FB 78F7 7CC3 79F6 DF07 |
| 44 |
6E9E CA3E 7BF6 7F97 9BE5 |
Archives