1 |
>>>>> On Sun, 27 Jul 2014, Martin Vaeth wrote: |
2 |
|
3 |
> Kent Fredric <kentfredric@×××××.com> wrote: |
4 |
>> -r1.1 weirdness feels like it may cause more problems than it solves. |
5 |
|
6 |
> So far, nobody pointed out any problem which would be caused by -r1.1. |
7 |
> Which is not surprising, since the idea is that -r1.1 cannot be |
8 |
> distinguished from -r2: |
9 |
> It is only a hint to the PM that he *may* shortcut certain phases when |
10 |
> updating from -r1. |
11 |
|
12 |
I wonder if it wouldn't be saner to leave our revision syntax |
13 |
untouched. |
14 |
|
15 |
Instead, one could introduce a variable INSTALL_VERSION that would |
16 |
default to ${PVR} but could be set to the version of a previous ebuild |
17 |
instead. The PM could compare it against INSTALL_VERSION in the VDB |
18 |
and skip build and installation if versions match. |
19 |
|
20 |
Advantages: |
21 |
- Support for the variable could be optional. PMs not supporting it |
22 |
would do a regular revbump instead. |
23 |
- One could even imagine USE-conditional syntax for the variable. |
24 |
|
25 |
Ulrich |