| 1 |
On Fri, 25 Jul 2014 05:44:34 +0000 (UTC) |
| 2 |
Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> How long have dynamic-deps been around? Since EAPI-0? Because if |
| 5 |
> so, that interpretation must be incorrect, since EAPI-0 was defined |
| 6 |
> as portage behavior at the time, and AFAIK, no EAPI since then has |
| 7 |
> been approved without a working portage implementation. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Good question, probably needs a dig in the old Portage history; it is |
| 10 |
something long the search terms of dynamic dependencies in |
| 11 |
FakeVarTree, given that the parameter[1] has been added later on. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
EAPI specifies what PMs need to conform to, not the other way around; |
| 14 |
EAPI-0 may very well be derived from Portage, that doesn't make such |
| 15 |
side features that have not been specified in EAPI-0 a part of EAPI-0. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
[1]: Add emerge --dynamic-deps <y|n> option. |
| 18 |
http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/portage.git;a=commit;h=f8e0c75e |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
> In the context of dynamic-deps I'd interpret the above to mean within |
| 21 |
> a single portage session. What happens some sessions later when an |
| 22 |
> ebuild's deps are dynamic-updated after a tree sync is an entirely |
| 23 |
> new session, and unless I'm missing something, the above PMS |
| 24 |
> requirements can be met within a single session with dynamic-deps. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Apart from the words "merge" and "batch", which are in the piece of |
| 27 |
text that I've quoted; I'm not sure how for the rest of the piece a |
| 28 |
session can be deduced or interpreted from what is specified. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
With kind regards, |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Tom Wijsman (TomWij) |
| 34 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
E-mail address : TomWij@g.o |
| 37 |
GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D |
| 38 |
GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D |
Archives