| 1 |
Wulf C. Krueger wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> For quite some time now, our progress has been impaired by the absence of |
| 4 |
> features like USE dependencies, ranged dependencies and suggested |
| 5 |
> dependencies. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
How do suggested dependencies help in your work? |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> Most of us who are working on the overlay have been using alternative |
| 10 |
> package managers (PM) for quite some time now. Thus, the idea arose to go |
| 11 |
> a step further and actually make good use of the capabilities they offer |
| 12 |
> us. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
Makes sense; after all you can do whatever you want in an overlay without |
| 15 |
concern for how it will affect anyone else. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> You'll find all the details in the following local copy of PMS with the |
| 18 |
> kdebuild-1 patch applied: http://www.mailstation.de/pms.pdf |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
Thanks, I'll have a closer look when I get some downtime. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> For starters, we'll be using the new EAPI for live ebuilds (${PV}=-scm) |
| 23 |
> only, so that users of other PMs will be able to use the rest of the |
| 24 |
> overlay as before. That's exactly what the kdebuild-1 EAPI was designed |
| 25 |
> to allow for. |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> For users of the KDE overlay's live ebuilds the new EAPI currently means |
| 28 |
> they will have to use Paludis but there are rumours ;) other PMs are |
| 29 |
> interested as well. That's the main reason to optionally include it in |
| 30 |
> PMS. |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
Could you explain exactly what -scm-foo offers over the existing -cvs |
| 33 |
implementation? I'm assuming it's something more than what you've outlined |
| 34 |
here. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
A bit more info on how the other features have helped would be nice (maybe a |
| 37 |
GMN article?) |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
Thanks. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
-- |
| 43 |
gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives