1 |
On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 12:05:26 +0100 |
2 |
Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> > On 18/11/15 08:25, Ulrich Mueller wrote: |
5 |
> >> - If you mix stable and unstable then you are by definition an |
6 |
> >> advanced user, who will be able to cope with the situation. :) |
7 |
|
8 |
> Only that there is no real difference to the existing situation when |
9 |
> mixing stable and unstable. It is not guaranteed that all dependencies |
10 |
> of an unstable package are stable, so already now users may have to |
11 |
> accept the ~ keyword for dependencies in some cases. Similarly, such |
12 |
> users may have to accept EAPI 6 for some dependencies, which implies |
13 |
> that they install a package manager supporting EAPI 6. |
14 |
|
15 |
When ~ keywording is needed for dependencies, the PM's output makes it |
16 |
clear what's needed. In cases where EAPI 6 is needed for dependencies |
17 |
but the PM is unaware of EAPI 6, will there be good clues in the PM's |
18 |
output that the PM itself needs to be ~ keyworded? |