| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
|
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1
|
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 12:14:38 -0500
|
| 5 |
Ian Stakenvicius <axs@g.o> wrote:
|
| 6 |
> On 17/01/13 11:47 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 7 |
> > On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 07:47:18 -0800 Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o> |
| 8 |
> > wrote: |
| 9 |
> >> REPLACING_VERSIONS always refers to packages with identical SLOT |
| 10 |
> >> to the current package |
| 11 |
> > |
| 12 |
> > No it doesn't. If you have foo-1:a and foo-2:b installed, and then |
| 13 |
> > you install foo-1:b, it replaces both 1:a and 2:b. |
| 14 |
> > |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> that would be an interesting case with portage, given if foo-1:a moved |
| 17 |
> to foo-1:b that should occur via a slot-move shouldn't it? |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
There's nothing forcing that to be the case.
|
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
- --
|
| 22 |
Ciaran McCreesh
|
| 23 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
| 24 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
|
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
iEYEARECAAYFAlD4MbkACgkQ96zL6DUtXhEuHgCeJhIsL1d8XofM6RAUCyXwgrPd
|
| 27 |
3o4AoJpCWOx4SjoMB/O/SfsQ+tl7VBjp
|
| 28 |
=doTo
|
| 29 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives