| 1 |
El lun, 21-07-2014 a las 20:55 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh escribió: |
| 2 |
> On Mon, 21 Jul 2014 21:53:04 +0200 |
| 3 |
> "Andreas K. Huettel" <dilfridge@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> > Revision must be bumped when the on-disk files installed by the |
| 5 |
> > ebuild are changed. |
| 6 |
> > Nothing about dependencies. |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> > This has been policy for a LONG time, and we're not going to change |
| 9 |
> > it overnight just because you protest. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> Policy used to be that you'd do a revbump when you wanted users to |
| 12 |
> reinstall stuff, and you wouldn't otherwise. The only complication is |
| 13 |
> that sometimes you want users to reinstall stuff so that there's |
| 14 |
> accurate dependency information available, rather than because |
| 15 |
> something has changed. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Maybe this could be solved by having two kinds of revisions: |
| 19 |
- One would rebuild all as usually (for example, -r1...) |
| 20 |
- The other one would only regenerate VDB and wouldn't change the |
| 21 |
installed files (for example, -r1.1) |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
But I am not sure if it could be viable from a "technical" point of |
| 24 |
view :( |
Archives