| 1 |
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 5:17 PM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Dnia 2014-07-27, o godz. 17:08:27 |
| 3 |
> Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> napisał(a): |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>> I'd think that portage should update vdb as soon as it detects the |
| 6 |
>> dependency change. Then B would no longer depend on A in vdb. It |
| 7 |
>> shouldn't hold onto outdated information. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> You just introduced the opposite breakage -- when a dependency on C was |
| 10 |
> added, it ends up in vdb before C is installed. Now if C and current |
| 11 |
> version of A are removed before C gets installed, you end up having |
| 12 |
> broken dependency in vdb. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
There is a possibility that you had the broken dependency before you |
| 16 |
even synced - you just didn't realize it yet. After all, if the dep |
| 17 |
was added only as the result of an actual on-disk change, there should |
| 18 |
have been a revbump. So, having a missing dep in vdb just makes vdb |
| 19 |
reflect reality. You can get a missing dep in vdb by unmerging a |
| 20 |
package without using depclean. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
An unmet dependency is still a dependency. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
> Plus, 'as soon' means you're making --pretend actually write something. |
| 25 |
> That's bad. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
This isn't all that different from package moves. I believe that |
| 28 |
modifies vdb as soon as it detects updates. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
There is the issue of syncing and then not updating and then having |
| 31 |
all the packages removed from the tree - you're then missing a |
| 32 |
package and have no easy way to install it. But, in that case you can |
| 33 |
put the necessary ebuilds into your overlay and then portage can make |
| 34 |
everything right. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Rich |
Archives