Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] tree dependency check

[Marius Mauch]

On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 08:30:17 +0900
Jason Stubbs <jstubbs@g.o> wrote:

> On Thursday 30 March 2006 01:21, Marius Mauch wrote:
> > Marius Mauch schrieb:
> > > So after manifest2 is in, I'll revive the other issue that IMO is
> > > a requirement for 2.1: enforcing dependencies needed to use the
> > > tree (see old threads or glep44 for reasoning).
>
> Can you summarise the reasoning again please?

a) avoid massive breakage when certain new features are introduced
(past examples being cascading profiles or new-style virtuals)
b) similar to a) allow people to use new features without having to
wait for a year or two

> > - at sync time first check the tree format of the remote tree, if
> > we can't handle it the sync is aborted
>
> While I haven't checked over the code at all, the point above above
> sounds problematic. What happens if the a user installs the latest
> with this patch and then doesn't sync for three years? The tree may
> then require a later portage but the user can't sync to be able to
> emerge a later portage.

!!! This upgrade might fail, in that case please read the
!!! following documents for help:
!!! http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/portage/doc/common-problems.xml
!!!
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/portage/doc/manually-fixing-portage.xml

These docs will then tell the user about the following options
a) use the secret override
b) manually update the tree with wget+tar
c) perform an manual update (as in wget portage-version.tar.bz2, ...)

That should be an extreme exception though, there will be some rules
regarding format bumps (like "only use formats where that haven been
supported by stable portage for n months").

Marius
-- 
gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list