Re: [gentoo-dev] Policy-level discussion for minimum versions on dependencies

[Ian Stakenvicius]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 06/11/13 10:26 AM, Kent Fredric wrote:
>
> On 7 November 2013 04:15, Ian Stakenvicius <axs@g.o
> <mailto:axs@g.o>> wrote:
>
>
> The bug that was filed, is that a user didn't do a full emerge
> -uDN @world prior to emerging (upgrading?) firefox, and they had
> icu-49 already installed.  Because the firefox dep didn't have a
> minimum version, portage didn't see upgrading icu as a requirement
> before firefox emerged.
>
>
> Theres another scenario not listed here which can still happen:
>
> The end user has a copy of icu-49.ebuild somewhere in their
> portage layout still.
>
> Either this is due to a published overlay containing it, or them
> locally maintaining their own private overlay.

Yes, however there's no way to keep overlays (especially unofficial
ones) from messing with what portage does, and IMO there shouldn't be
- -- I think we've made it clear that conflicts arising between in-tree
and overlay packages (whether they be deps or not) are for the
end-users to resolve.

That said, I agree:

> Here, the *only* sane approach is for firefox to declare it needs
> a certain version of icu as a minimum, regardless of what is, and
> what isn't visible in tree, so that the end user at very least gets
> told "firefox needs this", and its then their responsibility to
> sort out the problem if they've caused one.

Option #2 to me also seems to be the way to go..

If we can reach a consensus here, adding some text to the devmanual or
developer guide should suffice, yes?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iF4EAREIAAYFAlJ6YykACgkQ2ugaI38ACPApYgD/fx1QrWxlBWOxJX5lsIqS1DVp
E3ClB9ketAWsPt7LmqMBAI1mVm/td9BLyfSGSP+Qi43kTzR+TISwecvPmqnvsKYE
=W3Ul
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----