| 1 |
On Sun, 2011-12-18 at 23:07 +0100, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote: |
| 2 |
> Alexandre Rostovtsev schrieb: |
| 3 |
> > Answers to anticipated questions: |
| 4 |
> Q8: SLOT can change after the package was installed. How to handle this |
| 5 |
> case? |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
I think the slotmove should happen without renaming the documentation |
| 8 |
directory; silently moving installed files after an emerge --sync |
| 9 |
without the user's explicit request seems a bad idea. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
This means that a slotmove could result in a future file collision. If |
| 12 |
foo-1.0 and foo-2.0 were in slot "1", and >=foo-2.0 was slotmoved from |
| 13 |
"1" to "2", then if a user had foo-2.0 installed before the slotmove, |
| 14 |
attempting to install foo-1.0 after the slotmove would result in a file |
| 15 |
collision in /usr/share/doc/*/foo-1. Such collisions would have to be |
| 16 |
resolved with the usual technique of revbumps and blockers. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
However, in practice slotmoves that could cause such collisions are |
| 19 |
infrequent. Among the 94 slotmoves for 2009 and 2010, I see only five |
| 20 |
that would have resulted in potential file collisions in /usr/share/doc |
| 21 |
under the proposed scheme: ati-drivers, clojure, vala, libchamplain, and |
| 22 |
clutter-gtk. Among the several hundred slotmoves for 2011 so far, I see |
| 23 |
*zero* that would have resulted in a collision. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
It is possible that I missed some, but even then, I think that less than |
| 26 |
10% of slotmoves - probably much less - would have been affected. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-Alexandre. |
Archives