Gentoo Archives: gentoo-portage-dev

From: Alec Warner <warnera6@×××××××.edu>
To: gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] .53, .54 and beyond...
Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 00:42:57
Message-Id: 4387AF66.9090007@egr.msu.edu
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] .53, .54 and beyond... by Ciaran McCreesh
1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
2 Hash: SHA1
3
4 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
5 > On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 19:00:07 -0500 Ned Ludd <solar@g.o> wrote:
6 > | > Why introduce a feature which is crippled? It would be almost as
7 > | > easy to allow ebuilds to mess with their 'real' runtime dependency
8 > | > value as appropriate rather than forcing an incorrect
9 > | > auto-generated list onto everyone.
10
11 Talking on solar about this confirmed my suspicions, the ELF data
12 can't be wrong, otherwise things won't link properly. Thus if we were
13 just to use ELF NEEDED entries, how could the list of reverse runtime
14 deps be "incorrect" as you imply above? The only assumption here is
15 that ELF is supported on that platform/arch.
16
17 > |
18 > | Please go back to trolling on dev We are trying to get work done here
19 > | and solve real problems.
20 >
21 > Sure. You're inventing some arbitrary problem which has no reflection
22 > upon reality and then solving some other arbitrary problem which has no
23 > reflection upon either reality or what you say you're solving. End
24 > result is more unnecessary complexity, more unnecessary mess and, once
25 > you realise your solution is inadequate, no doubt yet another
26 > incomplete hack on top of that.
27 >
28
29 So in regards to reverse dependency tracking, do you have a
30 solution/advice or just useless criticism? Please attempt to be
31 constructive here.
32 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
33 Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
34 Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
35
36 iQIVAwUBQ4evCWzglR5RwbyYAQKXlw//YqvAsDkbt3PYmCII6LELOs5qEo8iUPI9
37 IZuauacBt6uqoVY7UyP36Wt2ky9rqnO2fFlON6i39MjdfN3XsyVIRqVwf4agwWFM
38 QuH19h3wQfCsum5vMKZMej8qfskdpozj4VeTeU2f/NxS6g19LW8vzH7MTDY13tr3
39 bmY1unyQK7rx6bN+qtV/l22Doq4WnFBDWrY68L00wqHBGzn/VNl9Gh6JTVMTO/AL
40 +yEMma4b0+feCcfrSyxgiliSnaZS+ghJyLPyY4P/gVxDlOP577ufzKxPHgaOh9FN
41 hGaiSaS69Xf4XMcawcdmsE/Tp9Kp1uWXfJibaDCSw4xlmRwm7J26s97NaBu6YsWh
42 keJ1nnMl1O9fjuVCiERVJGMQCYJNAP7up+YAwC62FwNqJSOk5PMS8jz/+uPbWwSW
43 FRTZZCxTDe6JSbZ1RAPLY8xzQFtfdeU4T/wEiWj61w8yRqV132bHiay/lsVNq6P9
44 GWCvU7pphfe7cNDlk1cHT8eQOE91bVfmKdZBZ+eUgPQk6esMuMCh1MIj38s1lJOi
45 XGxIe3pECS7NPinv8n9ujaYoY7y7Uw+AQTbfFJjdRyldfciqbOpjiv4DfwgVIeiN
46 BE3bio08ybIT7Hb1g9GwPIkycbTbpT4JlBgAKrH3BIBs1d2Syae8DOR3P6WlJDZ/
47 lD1dIhX5JQ8=
48 =GkJo
49 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
50 --
51 gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] .53, .54 and beyond... Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@g.o>