Re: [gentoo-dev] Multiple Repo Support

[Spider (DmD Lj)]

On Fri, 2005-12-30 at 21:49 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> On Friday 30 December 2005 21:17, Spider (DmD Lj) wrote:
> >
> > No, what you suggested was that  for the case of when you depend on a
> > SLOT, then the tree is flattened.  My point was for the generic case :
> >
> > DEPEND=">=kde-base/kdelibs-3.0"   (as many ebuilds look today)
> >
> > is then expanded to the current matching SLOT of kdelibs, so even if
> > there -wasn't- a SLOT requirement beforehand, there is one afterwards.
>
> Okay, I misinterpreted. Anyway, it looks like neither of our ideas will work:
>
> app-text/docbook-sgml/docbook-sgml-1.0.ebuild:
>
> RDEPEND="app-text/sgml-common app-text/openjade
>         >=app-text/docbook-dsssl-stylesheets-1.64
>         >=app-text/docbook-sgml-utils-0.6.6
>         ~app-text/docbook-sgml-dtd-3.0
>         ~app-text/docbook-sgml-dtd-3.1
>         ~app-text/docbook-sgml-dtd-4.0
>         ~app-text/docbook-sgml-dtd-4.1"

> docbook-sgml-dtd-3.0-r3.ebuild:SLOT="3.0"
> docbook-sgml-dtd-3.1-r3.ebuild:SLOT="3.1"
> docbook-sgml-dtd-4.0-r3.ebuild:SLOT="4.0"
> docbook-sgml-dtd-4.1-r3.ebuild:SLOT="4.1"
>



Hmm, however theese are the ~ atoms, I'm not quite sure how those are
treated in the current tree, however in "my" proposal it would block
against "requirement of same package with different SLOT.  

However, since the ~ atoms are explicit and separate ( this depend tree
could as well be called :
app-text/docbook-sgml-dtd:3.0
app-text/docbook-sgml-dtd:3.1
app-text/docbook-sgml-dtd:4.0
app-text/docbook-sgml-dtd:4.1

Which, for some reason, should be supported : )   

Either by casing out appearances where multiple SLOTs are depended on by
-one- package, or by saying that ~ is special-cased due to its stricter
limitations, which would make it pass by the SLOT check.   

( no, its not an elegant solution, but it might work ;)


//Spider


-- 
begin  .signature
Tortured users / Laughing in pain
See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information.
end