| 1 |
On 09/16/2015 04:49 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: |
| 2 |
> Hi all, |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> here's a quote from the Council 20140826 summary: |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
>> Dynamic dependencies in Portage |
| 7 |
>> =============================== |
| 8 |
>> During discussion, is was remarked that some changes, e.g. to |
| 9 |
>> dependencies in eclasses, could require mass rebuilds of packages. |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> Vote: |
| 12 |
>> - "The council asks the Portage team to first outline their long-term |
| 13 |
>> plan regarding removal or replacement of dynamic dependencies, |
| 14 |
>> before they remove this feature. In particular, tree policies and |
| 15 |
>> the handling of eclasses and virtuals need to be clarified." |
| 16 |
>> Accepted unanimously. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> Since there seems to be interest in the Portage team to go ahead with that |
| 19 |
> plan, I'd like to ask about the tree policies and the handling of eclasses and |
| 20 |
> virtuals. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> I guess we'd appreciate this as a prerequisite for being able to give the plan |
| 23 |
> future council support. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> Cheers, |
| 26 |
> Andreas |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
could someone explain what the dynamic dependencies are in the context |
| 30 |
of portage and ebuilds? because that does seem to be something |
| 31 |
portage-internal specific in the way it handles changes in {,R}DEPEND |
| 32 |
without revbumps. Where is this thing documented in the first place? |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
Regards, |
| 36 |
Markos Chandras |
Archives