On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 14:17:06 -0400 Michael Orlitzky <m...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 2020-09-03 12:38, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > > > if some upgrade wants a package with unmatched deps (e.g. not > > installed at all or py38 usedep not satisfied), $PM will surely try > > to satisfy it by installing an ebuild. I don't think PMS specifies > > this, nor should it. > > > > It's not an upgrade per se. The situation is roughly this: > > 1. User installs foo-1.2.3.ebuild, which supports python-3.7. > 2. Developer ninja-edits the ebuild to support python-3.8. > 3a. (crickets) > 4a. Developer removes python-3.7 support from foo-1.2.3.ebuild. > 5a. The next time something pulls foo-1.2.3 into the depgraph, > the PM will see that the installed version of foo-1.2.3 depends > on python-3.7, but that there is no python-3.7 in the tree or that > it's masked. Now emerge always fails. py37 will (*) still be installed as it cannot be depcleaned because of 1. emerge won't fail since deps are satisfied. (*) or rather should, but I think the only case that matters is a valid system state where noone forced uninstall of a needed package or manually rm'ed some random files > > or.. > > 3b. Some reverse dependency of foo-1.2.3 gets python-3.8 support. > 4b. A user tries to install that revdep, but the PM sees that > the latest version of foo is already installed, and it (the > installed version) doesn't support python-3.8. Mysterious > error messages and manual intervention ensue. precisely the case I wrote above: unsatisfied dep -> pull ebuild. non-issue too. > What's happening is that the PM is using the metadata from the > installed version of the package, rather than the ninja-edited > metadata in the repo (how would it know which ebuilds were edited > meaningfully?). That's completely legal according to the PMS, and > also the smart thing to do: sourcing a few thousand lines of bash > *just in case* there was an important change in some ebuild is a huge > waste of users' time. you seem to be confusing dynamic deps and unsatisfied deps here. A package installed with py38 disabled (e.g. after a revbump) or no py38 support at all (e.g. without revbump) will not satisfy a [py38] usedep in any case so will work just the same > Developers have an easy way to signal that there was an important > change: to bump the "r" number at the end of the ebuild. This forces > any upgrade involving e.g. foo-1.2.3 to pull in foo-1.2.3-r1, and the > fact that an upgrade is available is evident from `ls`, rather than > from sourcing a mountain of bash. One developer makes a change, and > it saves thousands of users each a lot of time. That's what we're all > here for. fixing non-issues does not seem so important to me :/ [...]
