| 1 |
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 3:26 PM, Ciaran McCreesh |
| 2 |
<ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
> On Wed, 15 Aug 2012 15:18:24 -0400 |
| 4 |
> Michael Mol <mikemol@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 5 |
>> I've occasionally noticed portage tell me about circular dependencies, |
| 6 |
>> where the most straight forward resolution is to emerge some package |
| 7 |
>> in the loop twice. The first time, with a USE flag disabled (avahi and |
| 8 |
>> gtk are the usual suspects), and the second time with the USE flag |
| 9 |
>> enabled. |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> In circumstances where it's necessary to do something like that to |
| 12 |
>> reach a final desired system state, I'm not sure I see any problem |
| 13 |
>> with portage automatically doing the two-stage emerge. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> That's going to be rather horrible when your package mangler |
| 16 |
> "temporarily" turns off acl or turns on build... |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Fair observation; there would need to be a way either weight benign or |
| 19 |
dangerous USE/package flags, and search paths with weights outside of |
| 20 |
a 'safe' range would be discarded. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
A mechanism like that also offers a means of finding and favoring |
| 23 |
cheap rebuilds over expensive ones; rebuilding gcc an extra time ought |
| 24 |
to be disfavored over rebuilding, say, sudo. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
:wq |
Archives