| 1 |
On 09/05/2012 12:44 PM, Fabian Groffen wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 04-09-2012 12:37:17 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote: |
| 3 |
>> * Slot operator dependencies |
| 4 |
>> PMS wording: <http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/pms.git;a=commit;h=f9f7729c047300e1924ad768a49c660e12c2f906> |
| 5 |
>> Portage patch: <http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/portage.git;a=commit;h=e4ba8f36e6a4624f4fec61c7ce8bed0e3bd2fa01> |
| 6 |
>> Bug: <https://bugs.gentoo.org/229521> |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> The Portage patch doesn't match the PMS patch or the bug report. The |
| 9 |
> Portage patch refers to slot_abi, not slot operator dependencies. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
See the part about "Sub-slots", which are an extension of slot operator |
| 12 |
dependencies (equivalent to slot_abi in the above patch): |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
* Sub-slots |
| 15 |
PMS wording: |
| 16 |
<http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/pms.git;a=commit;h=5d6749ac9e5ddc5b1daaad7737b65fa81c6ece47> |
| 17 |
Portage patch: |
| 18 |
<http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/portage.git;a=commit;h=e4ba8f36e6a4624f4fec61c7ce8bed0e3bd2fa01> |
| 19 |
Bug: <https://bugs.gentoo.org/424429> |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
> While Bug and PMS wording seem to be included in the Portage patch, the |
| 22 |
> Portage patch appears to do much more, overloading SLOT with some ABI |
| 23 |
> information, which Bug and PMS do NOT mention. Instead, they assume |
| 24 |
> SLOT == ABI, probably as per Gentoo policy. |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> - the '/' delimiter in SLOT value is NOT mentioned in PMS |
| 27 |
> - PMS writes colon is immediately followed by '*' or '=' |
| 28 |
> - Portage docs define a missing sub-slot to be implicitly '0', but when |
| 29 |
> recording a slot dependency using '=', this default equals the value |
| 30 |
> of SLOT |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
It's in the Sub-slots PMS patch. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
> I'm not sure about sub-slot, and I can't find any case arguing in favour |
| 35 |
> of this feature. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
There was lots of discussion about it in the "About forcing rebuilds of |
| 38 |
other packages issue" [1] thread on gentoo-dev. My blog post about EPAI |
| 39 |
4-slot-abi is a good reference [2]. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
> Bug #424429 doesn't tell much more than how to use the |
| 42 |
> experimental version with an overlay. |
| 43 |
> Given that the sub-slot feature appears to be behind a special testing |
| 44 |
> EAPI now, I think it would be fair to at least mention explicitly that |
| 45 |
> sub-slot is not going to be part of EAPI5 (or this very point) as is. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
It's also included in EAPI 5_pre1 [3], and given that sub-slots are |
| 48 |
already in the PMS eapi-5 branch, I've regarded it as a foregone |
| 49 |
conclusion that they'd be accepted in EAPI 5. I've even renamed all of |
| 50 |
the "slot-abi" stuff to refer to "slot-operator" in the portage sources [4]. |
| 51 |
|
| 52 |
[1] |
| 53 |
http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_f0e171be0f12abac2a10069e05e43c73.xml |
| 54 |
[2] |
| 55 |
http://blogs.gentoo.org/zmedico/2012/06/23/automatic-rebuilds-with-experimental-eapi-4-slot-abi/ |
| 56 |
[3] http://blogs.gentoo.org/zmedico/2012/09/02/experimental-eapi-5_pre1/ |
| 57 |
[4] |
| 58 |
http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/portage.git;a=commit;h=3ee4929c733a6c03f74d6e3f2ced29c30d0ca7b5 |
| 59 |
-- |
| 60 |
Thanks, |
| 61 |
Zac |
Archives