| 1 |
On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 09:19:48 -0700, |
| 2 |
Donnie Berkholz <spyderous@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Simon Stelling wrote: |
| 5 |
> > Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
| 6 |
> >> We are working to ensure the dependencies work as smoothly as |
| 7 |
> >> possible, but I expect there will be some issues since it's |
| 8 |
> >> difficult to require updates to all these optional drivers |
| 9 |
> >> following an update to the server. |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> > wouldn't !< atoms solve that problem? |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> The drivers cannot be upgraded until a newer server is installed. So |
| 14 |
> technically, this would allow things to work by forcing people to |
| 15 |
> unmerge all their drivers before upgrading, then remerge the new |
| 16 |
> versions. That's not a very desirable solution either, but do you |
| 17 |
> think it's the best one? |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
What about a big PDEPEND in xorg-server-1.1 ebuild, with a bunch of |
| 21 |
"video_cards_foobar? ( >=x11-drivers/xf86-video-foobar-NewVersion )"? |
| 22 |
That should be enough to force a smooth update of the video drivers |
| 23 |
after the server. And, the RDEPEND on video drivers could be removed |
| 24 |
from the xorg-x11 meta-ebuild, to avoid redundancy. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Sure, it doesn't help users who have manually emerged some drivers |
| 27 |
without listing them all in $VIDEO_CARDS: they will still be able to |
| 28 |
update their server and keep some old broken drivers behind. But |
| 29 |
hopefully, they won't be so numerous (much less numerous than those who |
| 30 |
would be annoyed by some "!<..." block imho). |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
TGL. |
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives