Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Martin Vaeth <martin@×××××.de>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-dev] binpkg (was: don't rely on dynamic deps)
Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2014 13:55:58
Message-Id: slrnlt7cqg.9i1.martin@epidot.math.uni-rostock.de
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] don't rely on dynamic deps by Patrick Lauer
1 Patrick Lauer <patrick@g.o> wrote:
2 >
3 > Without binpkg support I'd feel the need to hack it up, just to get things
4 > fast enough.
5
6 binpkg support has some severe problems currently, anyway.
7 I already described it in the bug, but since perhaps the
8 description was not clear, I repeat it here:
9
10 I regularly build binpackages for some client.
11 This client is updated only very infrequently
12 (once every few months).
13
14 Of course, before I emerge the binpkgs, I update the
15 portage tree on that client, and also copy my
16 /etc/portage/package* directories.
17
18 Then it turns out that I can use *less* than half of
19 my binpkgs on the client: The binpkgs are just ignored.
20
21 One reason I found: I had temporarily set ~ARCH for some
22 package in /etc/portage/package.accept_keywords
23 when building the package, and removed the entry again
24 (and thus also on the client) once the package has become
25 stable. I hope that you agree that my expectation is
26 sane that the binpkg should be used anyway - but it isn't.
27
28 For others I do not know the reason, but probably it is
29 very similar that some variables/settings at the time
30 of building the package were different from the current
31 ones in the tree.
32
33 So, I do not know all the details, but currently
34 binpkg support is somewhat broken already.
35 What we would need is *more* pushing of information of
36 the current tree data to binpkgs, not *less*.
37 So dynamic deps (or another update mechanism)
38 appear to be a first step in *fixing* support for binpkgs...