| 1 |
Am Montag, 25. September 2017, 02:33:13 CEST schrieb Rich Freeman: |
| 2 |
> On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 2:51 PM, John Blinka <john.blinka@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
> >> Is this an officially approved technique?? it is DIRTY. |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> > I imagine that it is sanctioned, otherwise why would there be a |
| 6 |
> > --changed-deps flag to emerge? Does seem dirty. Glad you asked the |
| 7 |
> > question. Would love to learn why this is allowed. In my experience, it |
| 8 |
> > happens quite often. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Is this recent experience in the main repository? This is something |
| 11 |
> QA started cracking down on maybe a year ago. It is definitely |
| 12 |
> problematic, because portage won't pull in the new dependency until |
| 13 |
> you re-install the package, which means the dependency could get |
| 14 |
> removed/etc. I'd have to dig up the details around the policy - it |
| 15 |
> might be allowed in very limited circumstances (there could be reasons |
| 16 |
> to change a dep that won't actually break anything already installed). |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> I ended up putting --changed-deps in my update script because I'd |
| 19 |
> rather not deal with the bugs this can cause. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
I think the debate somewhere ended at "it's maintainer's call, weighing |
| 22 |
unnecessary rebuilds versus technical correctness". |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Not sure how time-consuming a qcustomplot is. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Andreas K. Hüttel |
| 29 |
dilfridge@g.o |
| 30 |
Gentoo Linux developer (council, perl, libreoffice) |
Archives