1 |
Am 06.06.2010 13:50, schrieb Domen Kožar: |
2 |
>> And if you add a python slot or remove one, portage currently is not able to see that and to |
3 |
>> reinstall packages, which had modules installed for that slot. You need another tool |
4 |
>> (python-updater) to check that and to call the needed reinstalls. |
5 |
> |
6 |
> I agree with this fact, user should not be required to read additional |
7 |
> documenation for portage to function as wanted. |
8 |
> |
9 |
> I'm very unfamiliar with inner workings of portage, but using |
10 |
> python-updater implementation, USE_PYTHON behaviour shouldn't be that |
11 |
> hard to implement? |
12 |
|
13 |
You want some additional switch to portage, which does the work of python-updater? That would just |
14 |
move the code, but would still have the same limitations. What does speak against explicit user |
15 |
control for optional features/slots, including dependency handling by the package manager like in my |
16 |
proposal? |
17 |
|
18 |
-- |
19 |
Thomas Sachau |
20 |
|
21 |
Gentoo Linux Developer |