Re: [gentoo-dev] Actions of python team, especially Arfrever wrt python eclass and python-3*

[Michał Górny]

On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 04:19:28 +0200
Sebastian Pipping <sping@g.o> wrote:

> Thomas,
>
>
> On 06/06/10 04:01, Thomas Sachau wrote:
> > [..] so even if it is not pulled in during installation, it will be
> > pulled in during world update.
>
> sounds right.  Preventing this requires either masking or a
> dont-pull-uninstalled-slots switch for portage (which I am not
> suggesting), right?

In fact, these two seem to be the most reasonable solutions
for the problem. While this switch idea is more universal (and I guess
-- not that hard to implement), masking should be simpler.

> > Since python-3* is currently useless and not required for any
> > package, the dependency should by default only pull in python-2*
> > like this:
> >
> > =dev-lang/python-2*
> >
> > With that, the default way would not pull in a package, which is
> > not needed or used. And if there will be any package, which really
> > requires python-3*, it simply requests it in (R)DEPEND of the
> > ebuild, which then would overwrite the default value of the eclass
> > and pull in python-3*.
>
> That's an interesting idea.

It sounds quite pointless to me. Forcing the packages to assume they
don't support the newer version just because nothing requires it yet?

> > Are there any reasons to pull in a package, which is not requested
> > by the user, not required by any package and by default not used by
> > any package?
>
> That a question I haven't seen answered before, either.  Arfrever?

It _is_ requested by user. User requested upgrade of all dependant
packages, and here it goes.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

<http://mgorny.alt.pl>
<xmpp:mgorny@××××××.ru>