Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ian Stakenvicius <axs@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] About forcing rebuilds of other packages issue
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2012 19:14:52
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] About forcing rebuilds of other packages issue by Pacho Ramos
Hash: SHA256

On 07/06/12 03:00 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> El jue, 07-06-2012 a las 19:44 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh escribió: >> On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 20:43:54 +0200 Pacho Ramos <pacho@g.o> >> wrote: >>>> I would prefer, as a workaround, allow reverse deps to >>>> RDEPEND on glib:2.* instead. That way it would cover more >>>> cases when more than two slots are available >>> >>> Well, per: >>>;a=commitdiff;h=f9f7729c047300e1924ad768a49c660e12c2f906;hp=b7750e67b4772c1064543defb7df6a556f09807b >>> >>> >>>
looks like "*" usage for SLOTs would be allowed :), or I am
>>> misinterpreting it? >> >> It's not a wildcard. >> > > But it looks like a valid usage for cases like glib vs. > dbus-glib/gobject-introspection I have exposed as example, and > also allows us to keep "SLOT" over "ABI_SLOT" (at least for this > case, not sure about others I could be missing now...)
How is the case of something like libpng going to be handled, where we only support one API (and so only one SLOT)? Either in the proposed ABI_SLOT thing or when using slot operators? For the slot-operator case, will every consumer of libpng be forced to change their dep to libpng:= to ensure they get rebuilt when libpng bumps from 1.5 to 1.6?? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAk/Q/XsACgkQ2ugaI38ACPCxWQEAgkx7C2PBK/awXvfA3RFolZQD 2K7G7cBboDvDexn/JogA/0W/ke62zz7Mtk/i6WLATIaUYRQ+8ViK2Y4J8n4C3yVZ =SQX9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] About forcing rebuilds of other packages issue Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com>