| 1 |
On Monday 12 of March 2012 01:49:35 Brian Harring wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 04:14:33PM +0100, Ch??-Thanh Christopher Nguy???n |
| 3 |
wrote: |
| 4 |
> > Ciaran McCreesh schrieb: |
| 5 |
> > >> Is there really much of a benefit to this? I guess for anybody who |
| 6 |
> > >> runs scripts to mass-manipulate ebuilds it might be helpful, but I |
| 7 |
> > >> think all the package managers planned on supporting all the EAPIs for |
| 8 |
> > >> quite a while longer. |
| 9 |
> > > |
| 10 |
> > > We have to support them indefinitely. It's not possible to uninstall a |
| 11 |
> > > package whose EAPI is unknown. |
| 12 |
> > |
| 13 |
> > Would it be feasible to do a pkg_pretend() check and refuse |
| 14 |
> > install/upgrade if packages with unsupported EAPI are detected? |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> The question should be "is it worth doing it", rather than "can we |
| 17 |
> hack out something". |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> As Ciaran said, PM's are going to be supporting EAPI1 indefinitely |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
In principle, it's actually entirely possible for any PM to start supporting |
| 22 |
exclusively completely API and ABI-breaking EAPI. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
There's always the problem with self-upgrading software as it needs to somehow |
| 25 |
predict (and limit) its development to keep upgrade paths. |
| 26 |
We have this exact problem where I work (with updating basestation SW) and |
| 27 |
some solution for this software is to stop being self-upgrading. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
With external upgrade tool (which would rsync package tree do any |
| 30 |
vdb/metadata-magic needed) one could replace current PM with latest, API/ABI- |
| 31 |
incompatible PM version. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Now, it may not really make sense for PM as upgrade process of PM itself isn't |
| 34 |
any different from upgrade process of any other package, still it would allow |
| 35 |
any API/ABI-breaking ebuild format changes to be introduced if we really need |
| 36 |
them so badly. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
-- |
| 39 |
regards |
| 40 |
MM |
Archives