1 |
On Fri, Apr 9, 2021 at 5:19 PM Sam James <sam@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> |
3 |
> |
4 |
> |
5 |
> > On 10 Apr 2021, at 01:13, Michael Orlitzky <mjo@g.o> wrote: |
6 |
> > |
7 |
> > On Sat, 2021-04-10 at 00:32 +0100, Sam James wrote: |
8 |
> >> |
9 |
> >> |
10 |
> >> Yes, this is the part I find difficult too. The important |
11 |
> >> distinction here was *bootstrapping* (which I missed) |
12 |
> >> but I think at least we should make a list of packages generally considered |
13 |
> >> critical for bootstrap. |
14 |
> >> |
15 |
> > |
16 |
> > What is a bootstrap package? |
17 |
> > |
18 |
> > There is some chicken-and-egg problem to be solved, but I don't think |
19 |
> > that we should be assuming that e.g. GNU grep is always present just |
20 |
> > because, during the base case of some recursive process, POSIX grep |
21 |
> > must be available temporarily. |
22 |
> > |
23 |
> > Anyway, https://bugs.gentoo.org/485356 awaits reopening if you make any |
24 |
> > progress on this. |
25 |
> > |
26 |
> |
27 |
> Oh, I agree completely. CCed myself on the bug and added to the list |
28 |
> to think about/work on. |
29 |
> |
30 |
> I’m pleased a bug existed in the past! I don’t agree with it being closed though: |
31 |
> documentation issues can exist without a patch existing to fix them yet, right? |
32 |
|
33 |
I worry a lot about more complex dependencies trees (imagine all of |
34 |
the exciting cycles in the currently excluded @system depgraph.) |
35 |
Remember that while in theory it would be great if portage knew about |
36 |
all of them; computing these nodes and edges isn't free. I question |
37 |
what we are really buying with the extra complexity. |
38 |
|
39 |
-A |