| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On 01/19/2015 12:44 PM, Róbert Čerňanský wrote: |
| 5 |
> On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 18:33:45 +0300 Andrew Savchenko |
| 6 |
> <bircoph@g.o> wrote: |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
>> On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 14:45:51 +0000 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 9 |
>>> The problem isn't the constants, though. The problem is the |
| 10 |
>>> resolution algorithm. There's not much point tweaking |
| 11 |
>>> performance until the resolver is fixed to produce a correct |
| 12 |
>>> answer... |
| 13 |
>> |
| 14 |
>> Oh, this was discussed so many times already... There is NO |
| 15 |
>> single correct solution to such problems. And some mathematically |
| 16 |
>> correct solutions are impractical (e.g. half of the tree |
| 17 |
>> rebuild), so other ones which are good enough are preferred. As |
| 18 |
>> long as imperfect solution works fine, I'm ok with it. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> From my point of view it would do much help if portage resolves |
| 21 |
> USE dependencies automatically instead of telling the user to |
| 22 |
> change USE flags manually (I am talking about bug #258371). |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> Robert |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
As a user, the last thing I want happening is Portage making USE |
| 29 |
decisions for me. I'm completely in support of an emerge *flag*, but |
| 30 |
not doing it unconditionally. |
| 31 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 32 |
Version: GnuPG v2 |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUvXBBAAoJEJUrb08JgYgHqsQH/1m/Dgu547RTcooHhZ+B4gt1 |
| 35 |
FvjPGy1qEKB4W2ErxDj6J6TLlP09ASIiJ/7hrndKonDNd1aP4gAi7tKI5XzetWVt |
| 36 |
cWYG3UWLhxJRvMc2y7kbOyDSIy68Sz/r1Bruwymqdn+N6ooqnHVK252OJgaMGQHP |
| 37 |
aDa+ibNAywE7t/CTWS6rQU/ilEHsXIps+c4gmvEGv5iWiCKxlQF5fNKfWjOGEr9c |
| 38 |
NN23RaSEJj7BCEfFaFgmjd7P0akz/yzg/sr8xuaaEwUv5/KFJp7SI/Q/6GzG48rg |
| 39 |
H6TiNIYm3Gs0ucEWISCZx+qon5EmkkSREaQ5xeqBBRklNN63evH1pttjFg9rX6o= |
| 40 |
=RjLq |
| 41 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives