Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2014-08-12

[Seemant Kulleen]

Hi Rich,

And what I'm really asking for here is for somebody to actually
> explain what is actually wrong with dynamic dependencies.  I have seen
> 47 almost-certainly-sincere claims that they're broken, but little in
> the way of examples, and the one that has been given (prerm) seems
>

Are you saying you agree that the prerm example is a valid one, except for:


> likely to break with static deps the way it is implemented today (we
> don't unmerge reverse-deps before upgrading the dep, which breaks
> linking that might be required to unmerge the package in the first
> place - though it probably only breaks 0.01% of the time and the cure
> is likely worse than the disease).
>

I got lost here.  Are you invalidating the example or is this a more meta
invalidating your invalidation?

Surely a 99.9% valid example is pretty valid, or did I misinterpret?

Cheers,

Seemant