Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn" <chithanh@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in net-im/qutecom: metadata.xml ChangeLog qutecom-2.2_p20110210.ebuild
Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2011 22:32:17
Message-Id: 4E88E644.8070506@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in net-im/qutecom: metadata.xml ChangeLog qutecom-2.2_p20110210.ebuild by Samuli Suominen
1 Samuli Suominen schrieb:
2 >>> Poor example to make a case.
3 >>
4 >> VIDEO_CARDS is just for user convenience. run "emerge nvidia-drivers" on
5 >> any system with xorg-server-1.11 installed and it will downgrade, no
6 >> matter what VIDEO_CARDS is set to.
7 >
8 > And your point is?
9
10 My point is that packages can cause downgrades through "<" dependencies.
11 There is no rule against it.
12
13 Maybe going through upgrade/downgrade cycles is inconvenient for some
14 users, or downgrades affect a package that you are particularly
15 interested in. That still doesn't make it justified to remove a package
16 against the maintainer's wishes. And certainly not to remove it twice
17 cutting short the required treecleaning process, the second time _after_
18 I have stated to be willing to fix the bug and challenging you to point
19 out the authoritative documentation my ebuild was in violation of.
20
21 >> And the wording clearly does only apply to package removals.
22 >
23 > The fact that the *common sense* snippet was inserted in this document,
24 > but isn't documented else where... doesn't make it any less true.
25
26 It may be obvious to you, but it certainly is not obvious to me why
27 linux-headers downgrade is so bad. If vapier's unsupported out-of-tree
28 software fails to build against old linux-headers, then he has to make
29 sure to have the correct version installed before proceeding. Blaming
30 that on qutecom is far-fetched IMO.
31
32
33 Best regards,
34 Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn

Replies