| 1 |
Hi folks, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
just a little braindump, how revdep-rebuild could be made |
| 5 |
(partially) obsolete in future: |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
Today it might happen that on an library update an old .so file |
| 8 |
gets unmerged while still used by somebody - that's what revdep- |
| 9 |
rebuild scans for. While it should catch those cases, we still |
| 10 |
have some downtime for certain packages (in bad cases, when it |
| 11 |
broke somewhere deep in the dependency chain, rebuild might take |
| 12 |
quite a lot of time). |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
The main problem IMHO is that portage doesn't record which libraries |
| 15 |
some package links in, so it doesn't know which ones have to be |
| 16 |
protected from unmerge (unless explicitly stated somewhere). |
| 17 |
So I'd propose to add record that information. On next merge, |
| 18 |
this information can be used for an automatic library-protect. |
| 19 |
This would also record which libraries have been protected from |
| 20 |
removal and for whom. Subsequent merges will update this that, |
| 21 |
and once all importers have been unmerged, depclean can clean |
| 22 |
up the leftover dirt. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
What do you think about this idea ? |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
cu |
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
---------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| 31 |
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT service -- http://www.metux.de/ |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
phone: +49 36207 519931 email: weigelt@×××××.de |
| 34 |
mobile: +49 151 27565287 icq: 210169427 skype: nekrad666 |
| 35 |
---------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| 36 |
Embedded-Linux / Portierung / Opensource-QM / Verteilte Systeme |
| 37 |
---------------------------------------------------------------------- |
Archives