| 1 |
Thomas, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On 06/06/10 04:01, Thomas Sachau wrote: |
| 5 |
> [..] so even if it is not pulled in during installation, it will be pulled in during world update. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
sounds right. Preventing this requires either masking or a |
| 8 |
dont-pull-uninstalled-slots switch for portage (which I am not |
| 9 |
suggesting), right? |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
So that means Python-3 is pulled in on world update no matter what |
| 12 |
version the eclass makes packages depend on, right? |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
> Since python-3* is currently useless and not required for any package, the dependency should by |
| 16 |
> default only pull in python-2* like this: |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> =dev-lang/python-2* |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> With that, the default way would not pull in a package, which is not needed or used. And if there |
| 21 |
> will be any package, which really requires python-3*, it simply requests it in (R)DEPEND of the |
| 22 |
> ebuild, which then would overwrite the default value of the eclass and pull in python-3*. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
That's an interesting idea. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Leaving potential non-portage Gentoo setups aside for the moment is |
| 27 |
there a case of a Gentoo with Python 3.x only where it would be forced |
| 28 |
to install 2.x then without reason, too? |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
I still wonder how it would prevent the update-world-pulls-py3k case. |
| 31 |
Would it? If not, would it still be of help? |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
> Are there any reasons to pull in a package, which is not requested by the user, not required by any |
| 35 |
> package and by default not used by any package? |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
That a question I haven't seen answered before, either. Arfrever? |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
Sebastian |
Archives