On Wed, 2024-09-25 at 23:46 +0100, James Le Cuirot wrote: > On Wed, 2024-09-25 at 14:41 -0400, Ionen Wolkens wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 02:05:10PM -0400, Eli Schwartz wrote: > > > Chewi was also trying to see if portage can be convinced to stage the > > > same package twice with different USE flags in the same emerge process > > > in order to solve cyclical USE flag dependencies, but it's not a > > > guarantee... > > > > I see it more as giving us hope of being able to remove whatever > > horrible hack we implement eventually, but I think the horrible > > hack will have to exist in the interim. > > Yes, the glib/gobject-introspection conflict was my main test case. It was an > interesting one because it also involved some blockers. I pushed my half baked > idea up to GitHub in the hope that Zac or someone could maybe take it and > actually make it work properly. The results so far have shown that it at least > seems feasible. Once complete, we could get it out the door quite quickly. > > As for GNOME, I'm afraid I don't use it, but I do recognise the importance > these packages have even on my KDE system, so I am very grateful for Leio's > hard work.
Sorry, meant to include a link to that. https://github.com/gentoo/portage/pull/1385
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
