| 1 |
On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 03:27:34PM +0200, Tiziano MMMller wrote: |
| 2 |
> > Via that, the resolver can see that a rebuild is necessary and plan a |
| 3 |
> > rebuild of all consumers (whether NEEDED based or revdep). Note |
| 4 |
> > preserve-lib would be rather useful here- specifically holding onto |
| 5 |
> > the intermediate lib while doing rebuilding. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> No, it doesn't help since you may have the same problems some people try |
| 8 |
> to solve in this thread. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Might I suggest in the future purning down what you're responding to, |
| 11 |
to just that blurb? At first read of your response I thought you were |
| 12 |
arguing against the ABI var itself (which didn't make a helluva lot of |
| 13 |
sense). |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Meanwhile, yes, using preserve lib there still has some issues- the |
| 16 |
reason I mentioned it possibly being held onto is that if we're |
| 17 |
talking about something like openssl, having your system be horked for |
| 18 |
the intervening period isn't a great thing thus it may be useful as an |
| 19 |
option at the least. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
> > This however breaks down |
| 22 |
> > a bit when the ABI change is in reverse of normal versioning. |
| 23 |
> How so? Such a var should just specify the ABI and the PM only has to |
| 24 |
> check whether it changed from one PVR to the other. The "how" is |
| 25 |
> completely irrelevant. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
That comment is in reference to if preserve-lib is still enabled for |
| 28 |
the rebuild. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
~harring |
Archives