1 |
On 12/18/13, 10:19 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: |
2 |
>>>>>> On Wed, 18 Dec 2013, Fabio Erculiani wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
>> I have never seen something like that and this generated an |
5 |
>> interesting bug in entropy (well, I fixed it...). What I am asking |
6 |
>> is quite simple though. Is this allowed? |
7 |
> |
8 |
> The PMS does not allow it: |
9 |
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~ulm/pms/5/pms.html#x1-390004.4.4 |
10 |
|
11 |
I think it goes even further: |
12 |
|
13 |
"Any name that has appeared as the origin of a move must not be reused |
14 |
in the future. Any slot that has appeared as the origin of a slot move |
15 |
may not be used by packages matching the spec of that slot move in the |
16 |
future." |
17 |
|
18 |
To me this means moving the packages in question back to slot 2 is never |
19 |
allowed, because they were once removed from it. |
20 |
|
21 |
Does this interpretation sound correct? What is the rationale for PMS logic? |
22 |
|
23 |
Finally, do we have a good way now to automate checks against this? |
24 |
|
25 |
Paweł |