| 1 |
On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 11:58:09 +0200 |
| 2 |
hasufell <hasufell@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On 09/18/2015 11:55 AM, Duncan wrote: |
| 5 |
> > Alexis Ballier posted on Fri, 18 Sep 2015 11:04:19 +0200 as |
| 6 |
> > excerpted: |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> >>> Keep in mind what this implies when you change these dependencies |
| 9 |
> >>> without bumping the ebuilds that use them. |
| 10 |
> >> |
| 11 |
> >> only way i see these changing is with a new ros_messages_*** |
| 12 |
> >> useflag, which will cause a rebuild anyway |
| 13 |
> > |
| 14 |
> > ?? Only with --newuse or similar, tho? Otherwise USE (or |
| 15 |
> > USE_EXPAND here) changes don't trigger rebuilds, do they? |
| 16 |
> > |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> Correct. It's not good to rely on this and expect users to have a |
| 19 |
> certain update pattern or even use a particular PM. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
then they wont have the messages if they don't rebuild, and |
| 23 |
cat/pkg[ros_messages_newthing] deps wont be satisfied and the pm will |
| 24 |
do the right thing by rebuilding. |
| 25 |
nothing to worry about, really. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
makes me think it'd be better to use (-) usedeps there, just to comply |
| 28 |
with the half-broken definition of eapi2-style usedeps |
Archives