1 |
Marius Mauch <genone@g.o> writes: |
2 |
|
3 |
> That's what `emerge @preserved-rebuild` does, or do you mean something |
4 |
> different? |
5 |
|
6 |
I meant something different, see the rst. |
7 |
> Well, with preserve-libs the situation is this (using your example): |
8 |
> - user upgrades expat, portage keeps libexpat.so.0 around |
9 |
> (some packages might now be linked against both versions if the session |
10 |
> included other packages as well) |
11 |
> - emerge tells the user to rebuild all affected packages (affected = |
12 |
> contains libexpat.so.0 in NEEDED, so includes both libfoo and bar) by |
13 |
> using `emerge @preserved-rebuild` (in the future this could also be done |
14 |
> automatically, but that won't be before 2.2 final) |
15 |
> - when all affected packages have been rebuilt (so their NEEDED entries |
16 |
> don't contain libexpat.so.0 anymore) libexpat.so.0 is automatically |
17 |
> removed |
18 |
|
19 |
Okay this works if the user follows the procedure and tries not to bend |
20 |
the rules... |
21 |
|
22 |
> So, if I understand you correctly (probably not), you want portage to |
23 |
> prevent the user from building any packages depending on any affected |
24 |
> package before the last step is completed? |
25 |
|
26 |
Yes this is exactly what I meant. Whenever a dependency is in the |
27 |
@preserved-rebuild set, it should not be linked against. It could still |
28 |
be used, but as now we don't have an easy way to distinguish between the |
29 |
two, I'd say it's better to check both DEPEND and RDEPEND and disallow |
30 |
its usage as a dependency until it's removed from the set. |
31 |
|
32 |
> Whoever that is is welcome to voice his opinion here, that's the point |
33 |
> of this thread after all. |
34 |
|
35 |
(It was mostly a disclaimer so that users don't feel like they get |
36 |
ignored without just cause if they want behaviour X and instead we go |
37 |
with behaviour Y... I'm sure a lot of people wouldn't like the option I |
38 |
proposed above, but trust me there's a reason why I voiced that concern |
39 |
:) ). |
40 |
|
41 |
-- |
42 |
Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò |
43 |
http://blog.flameeyes.eu/ |