| 1 |
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 21:40:26 +0100 |
| 2 |
Luca Barbato <lu_zero@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> >> Be specific. Explain how this works when, say, 0.34.4 is current, |
| 4 |
> >> you have a 0.34.5_live and 0.34.5 comes out. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> being live working as substitute for 0.34.5_preN (_live) component |
| 7 |
> the appearance of 0.34.5 will be higher than those. If we consider |
| 8 |
> the .live alternative you'd have 0.34.live that is shadowed only by |
| 9 |
> 0.35.x |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
So it doesn't work Right. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> That is pretty much the same you get with -scm, what happens is that |
| 14 |
> in the case of live template you have portage installing 0.34.5_preN |
| 15 |
> with revision informations and adding the template to the "live" set. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
No, with -scm the order works correctly. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> >> How do I track an upstream who has a 0.34 branch (which is equal |
| 20 |
> >> to or ahead of the most recent 0.34.x release), a 0.36 branch |
| 21 |
> >> (which is equal to or ahead of the most recent 0.36.x release) and |
| 22 |
> >> a master branch (which is ahead of any release) using the live |
| 23 |
> >> property? |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> the live property doesn't tell much about versioning |
| 26 |
> so you could use 9999 as the "x" version component or .live or -scm, |
| 27 |
> the live property just makes portage aware that the sources are live. |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> This situation is one in those pkg-scm and pkg.live work better, but |
| 30 |
> just for one branch. |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> As you said you could address the problem using useflags, so you |
| 33 |
> could by extension you can use the same way to address the single |
| 34 |
> case in proposals not supporting the tip of a single non version |
| 35 |
> branch as well: |
| 36 |
> |
| 37 |
> have the all the ebuilds in a package having IUSE=-live that if |
| 38 |
> enabled triggers the live property and changes the src_uri to the |
| 39 |
> live branch you desire. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
So if you do that, how does the package manager know that one version |
| 42 |
is less than another if a particular use flag is enabled, but greater |
| 43 |
than it if it is disabled? |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
> Again it had been answered in the summary anyway. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
I thought you had a better answer than "it doesn't work" that I was |
| 48 |
just missing. Evidently not... |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
-- |
| 51 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives