| 1 |
On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Nikos Chantziaras <realnc@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 26/02/18 17:24, Michael Orlitzky wrote: |
| 3 |
>> |
| 4 |
>> On 02/26/2018 10:16 AM, Peter Humphrey wrote: |
| 5 |
>>> |
| 6 |
>>> |
| 7 |
>>> Well, I'm on amd64, not ~amd64, and this morning portage wanted to |
| 8 |
>>> remerge |
| 9 |
>>> 217 packages. Removing --changed-deps reduced that to one: |
| 10 |
>>> sys-devel/llvm. |
| 11 |
>>> |
| 12 |
>> |
| 13 |
>> You do need to reinstall those. |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
>> The latest (un)stable versions of automake are hard-coded in |
| 16 |
>> autotools.eclass, and they wind up in the dependency string of every |
| 17 |
>> ebuild that uses the eclass. It's stupid, we don't need to do it, and it |
| 18 |
>> breaks all of those packages for other PMS-compliant package managers |
| 19 |
>> (--changed-deps is portage-only). Sorry, we can't make people not do |
| 20 |
>> this, apparently. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> Can't you whitelist packages like automake so that they don't trigger |
| 24 |
> rebuilds? Or at least provide a configurable whitelist (for make.conf) where |
| 25 |
> we can add packages that don't trigger changed-deps rebuilds? |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> There is no reason to rebuild anything just because of an automake update. |
| 28 |
> This is just madness. |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Are you using --deep? I suspect that is why changed-deps is looking |
| 32 |
at build-time dependencies. I don't see why you'd need to rebuild |
| 33 |
something if a build-time dependency changes, unless you really care |
| 34 |
about building with the latest build system (in which case you |
| 35 |
probably would want to rebuild after an automake update). |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
-- |
| 38 |
Rich |
Archives