Gentoo Archives: gentoo-pms

From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com>
To: Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o>
Cc: "Michał Górny" <mgorny@g.o>, gentoo-pms@l.g.o, Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-pms] Rephrasing *DEPEND
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2011 14:58:14
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-pms] Rephrasing *DEPEND by Ulrich Mueller
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 16:49:19 +0200
Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote:
> >> It would be more accurate to say that it's guaranteed except for > >> cases in which circular dependencies make it impossible to > >> guarantee. > > > This or other words, this makes this an unreliable feature. So, > > right now, users can't assume anything specific about dependencies > > being installed in pkg_*? > > Currently, PMS only says: "These must be installed and usable before > the ebuild is treated as usable." It doesn't say anything about > phases.
The intention with the "usable" stuff is this that purely RDEPEND cycles are resolvable, but any such cycles must be resolved before any package which has a DEPEND upon anything in the cycle is resolved. So if you've got this: first <-- rdepend --- second <-- depend --- third --- rdepend --> Then (first, second, third) and (second, first, third) are the only legal orderings. But if either RDEPEND became a DEPEND (and if we're not dealing with binary packages) then there would be no legal ordering. Whether or not what PMS says matches the intention is another matter... -- Ciaran McCreesh


File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature