On 06/07/13 14:37, Sergey Popov wrote:
> 07.06.2013 15:26, viv...@gmail.com пишет:
>> Hi everybody,
>> sometimes a package depend from another with a particular USE flag
>> turned on, example llvm-3.2 on dev-libs/udis86 +pic
>> Sometimes a new ebuild can change IUSE, indeed udis86-1.7-r1 removed pic
>> use which was present in 1.7-r0.
>>
>> This RFC is to understend what we (you actually) want the packages
>> manager to do in this situation, as I see it there are mainly two options.
>>
>> 1) when consider the dependency _always_ satisfied, if the requested USE
>> is not in IUSE.
>> this will make user life easier, since portage now barf conflicts but
>> the "wrong" dependency goes unnoticed and nobody will clean the ebuilds.
>>
>> 2) error out always, both if requested USE flag should have been enabled
>> or not, since it's a bug and should be fixed.
>> emerge -uDavNt will not that easy but the tree is cleaner as a
>> consequence, also the developer are forced^Wencouraged to look at the
>> reason the USE flag disappeared analizing if their package will continue
>> to work.
>>
>> finally the depend in llvm ebuild has this form:
>> DEPEND="udis86? ( dev-libs/udis86[pic(+)] )"
>> and the diff between udis86 ebuilds is like this:
>> -IUSE="pic test"
>> +IUSE="test"
> What's the question here? How to handle this? Read about USEDEP_DEFAULTS
> in PMS.
yes "how to handle this", thanks for the pointer to USE-DEP-DEFAULTS,
Ciaranm you too
>
> If you see broken packages(somebody forgot to change dependency) - file
> a bug about it.
>
According to the now readed fine manual, the ebuilds seem to be right,
llvm is EAPI=5, udis86-1.7-r1 is EAPI=4 and the previous one is EAPI=3,
dependency should be considered enabled if absent.
So the bug would be in portage, but the overzealous dep resolution seem
to arise only with "--with-bdeps=y" so I'm not opening it a bug.
