| 1 |
On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 7:40 AM, Michael Palimaka <kensington@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 01/22/2018 09:28 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: |
| 3 |
>> Am Montag, 22. Januar 2018, 08:01:08 CET schrieb Zac Medico: |
| 4 |
>>> |
| 5 |
>>> According to Gentoo policy, future ebuild dependency changes need to be |
| 6 |
>>> accompanied by a revision bump in order to trigger rebuilds for users. |
| 7 |
>>> Therefore, you should only need to use --changed-deps=y for a single |
| 8 |
>>> deep @world update. After that, if you encounter installed packages with |
| 9 |
>>> outdated dependencies in a future deep @world update, then you should |
| 10 |
>>> report it as a bug. |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
>> Did you come up with a solution how to handle eclass-generated dependency |
| 13 |
>> changes then? |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> No. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> Bug #641346 was filed for clarification about this, but it just got |
| 18 |
> closed without answering the question or consulting anyone. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
From the bug: "I don't see the need for anything further before the |
| 21 |
default behavior can be changed in portage, I'm all for it matching |
| 22 |
PMS behavior." (More details in the comment.) |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
The question was "I would like to ask Council to state more precisely |
| 25 |
what needs to be specifically documented before we can stop enabling |
| 26 |
dynamic-deps in Portage by default." |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
So, the answer to the question appears to be "nothing." |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
That might not be an answer that you like, but it is an answer. I |
| 31 |
can't vouch for who was or wasn't consulted before it was given. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
Rich |
Archives