Gentoo Archives: gentoo-portage-dev

From: Alexander Berntsen <bernalex@g.o>
To: gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCH] depgraph._resolve: consider unresolved @system atoms fatal (bug 568354)
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2015 13:36:12
Message-Id: 567168BE.4020706@gentoo.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCH] depgraph._resolve: consider unresolved @system atoms fatal (bug 568354) by Zac Medico
1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
2 Hash: SHA512
3
4 On 16/12/15 04:31, Zac Medico wrote:
5 > On 12/15/2015 12:46 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
6 >> Since @system atoms are presumably chosen by someone who knows what
7 >> they are doing (usually a gentoo developer), it makes sense to consider
8 >> resolution failures for these atoms as fatal errors.
9 >>
10 >> X-Gentoo-Bug: 568354
11 >> X-Gentoo-Bug-url: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=568354
12 >
13 > Hmm, maybe this should suggest config changes, which could even be
14 > written with --autounmask-write. That would be much friendlier.
15 I have nothing against the original patch regardless.
16 - --
17 Alexander
18 bernalex@g.o
19 https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander
20 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
21 Version: GnuPG v2
22
23 iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJWcWhwAAoJENQqWdRUGk8BZuIP/As+0pVXZ5qJi0f6i2KptNLr
24 ztq7cnubCJUrzQsq2XtOzRnt+0XNjvuCFC3jw0+MZq0jW8dsy9WOPkxEKQppc2tL
25 dDE0BbBmc8q1Z+dx4VWUT+/H++i2hfTpThCaF/Qg9gVRCX1JZVaRMmcfEm7y86jY
26 ZB1/9v8k7ZKGHL0cy/FXZ+2YlSRNOfeu35GYF+Uzs8b4PPGCyAYis9I2cxMOe+z9
27 SK23iVYpmI1vfKDAXr+qszM4tSEm6Bw17DvPxObqy0WjuwhfnJgFvwye8E7TPK6G
28 8FZKmof/AjajzRoaNL4QsJaqJtVj1A1Sq6V4yOrYfvRgc5n6PHt+pL4kejZTVT2R
29 CPJGqn9+0pkiMD1GiykVidRHsmFVXkxCIkve1i0LcUU1BoL/7JfmXxlfoG/m6SOG
30 9ZbHuXn/YBwTWdvDi5rFXzFBnACbH5E5PipihW7u4fq3y1H0K8wH1lqrMUAME7LN
31 4/TxceiskbQMm721kxToU5WquUZ63b04LVrTtBYw8tbzdn0lSeKckt660MyUqcyL
32 As0Ehvn1WI6J9i97mXYDTF4YVNvHWi4TKEztQ8CoVRm/077npIJ+lXC9F3GcR68u
33 /4OX7MwopICDHVsdW89wDIQQY2fTvNNcPWnk8RCoIMFQ8ZgwVwnLJQaBHvtVGdIv
34 l3YHVJg/lp32W3dxa+JS
35 =rkYR
36 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Replies