| 1 |
On Wed, 17 Aug 2011 06:40:45 -0700 |
| 2 |
Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> Is the real issue that ebuild developers aren't using workarounds in |
| 4 |
> order to overcome the shortcomings of some dependency resolvers? |
| 5 |
> Really? |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
The real issue is that Portage has nearly as much unspecified voodoo |
| 8 |
in its behaviour as a web browser. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
If you think there are particular cases where resolution should be |
| 11 |
smarter then the way to proceed is to introduce well-specified |
| 12 |
metadata to handle it -- and, importantly, you should *not* implement |
| 13 |
a dodgy workaround in the mean time. There shouldn't be any weird |
| 14 |
magical difference in behaviour based upon package name, and if |
| 15 |
something isn't done properly then it shouldn't be there at all. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
-- |
| 18 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives