-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Marius Mauch wrote: > On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 10:16:03 +0200 > "Denis Dupeyron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On 10/10/07, Zac Medico <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> I think it's OK to start using package.use now considering that >>> package.use has been supported since portage-2.1.2 and that's been >>> stable since February. There are already a couple of packages using >>> it in the tree now. >> Is it a good idea for those ebuilds that require new features to have >> a >= dependency on a specific version of portage ? Or not ? > > No, as it wouldn't help anyway: the depgraph is calculated before > portage would be updated (so package.use/IUSE defaults wouldn't be > used).
Results may vary if the user doesn't manually upgrade portage before doing other upgrades. After portage upgrades itself it will exec emerge --resume if there are remaining packages in the merge list. Like you said, the new version of portage will not recalculate dependencies when it resumes, but it will recalculate USE flags (bugs #183683). It's inconsistent, which is one reason why the recommended practice is to upgrade portage alone before attempting to do additional updates. Eventually I'd like to add an option that behaves similar to --resume but also recalculates dependencies. Zac -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHDQwB/ejvha5XGaMRAr2FAJ9E0OtHnzKO+fYRahsqR6W13AYzvwCggIIi BqHtFv3zbFKoYj5bR7heK9k= =SaBU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
