| 1 |
On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 2:51 PM, John Blinka <john.blinka@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 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 |
-- |
| 22 |
Rich |
Archives