1 |
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 5:30 PM, Mike Gilbert <floppym@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
>> I guess I still think it should be possible to give Portage a hint not |
3 |
>> to install a new SLOT if the old SLOT is okay. |
4 |
> |
5 |
> In this case, I think we would need something more subtle than that; |
6 |
> most users would want a hypothetical python-2.8 to be installed, and |
7 |
> python-3 users will certainly want to be upgraded to python-3.3 when |
8 |
> that lands. |
9 |
> |
10 |
> In other words, if we tell portage not to upgrade to a new slot |
11 |
> automatically, that means users would have to manually install each |
12 |
> major release of python. |
13 |
|
14 |
No, I was going for the kind of effect where being inclusive wrt the |
15 |
new major Python version would be controlled in a single place. I.e. |
16 |
in the ebuild or in an eclass or some such. |
17 |
|
18 |
So you'd have SLOT="~3" in the python-3* ebuilds, and Portage would |
19 |
know to not install SLOT=3 unless requested explicitly, and at some |
20 |
point we'd remove the '~'. |
21 |
|
22 |
Cheers, |
23 |
|
24 |
Dirkjan |