Am Donnerstag, den 09.04.2009, 23:36 +0530 schrieb Nirbheek Chauhan:
> On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 10:15 PM, Tiziano Müller wrote:
> > roughly 90% packages depending on one of:
> >
> > sys-libs/db
>
> Why the hell does this have so many slots in-tree? I am unaware of the
> reasons for it. Horribly cha
On Thursday 09 April 2009 19:06:16 Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> > dev-lang/python
>
> So, wait, you want to depend on specific slots of python and keep them
> around, and manage all their related bugs? Isn't that exactly the
> opposite of what python upstream suggests, and *ALL* distros do?
If you in
On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 10:15 PM, Tiziano Müller wrote:
> roughly 90% packages depending on one of:
>
> sys-libs/db
Why the hell does this have so many slots in-tree? I am unaware of the
reasons for it. Horribly changed API every release? How does every
other distro handle sys-libs/db ?
> dev-lib
Am Donnerstag, den 09.04.2009, 12:03 +0200 schrieb Rémi Cardona:
> Mart Raudsepp a écrit :
> > Hello,
> >
> >
> > This thread is for any discussion about the slot operator support item
> > in EAPI-3 draft.
>
> Could anyone actually give a good reason for slot operators? What
> packages would ha
On Thu, 09 Apr 2009 05:25:33 +0300
Mart Raudsepp wrote:
> Are we sure := and :* is the syntax that makes sense once we try to
> cover some of the above with new syntax?
:= and :* covers the cases that can be covered with existing dependency
ranges. If you want to cover things that need horrible |
On Thu, 9 Apr 2009 17:06:47 +0530
Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> So you're looking for ABI deps? @preserved-libs is the answer (C-sharp
> support for that?). Suggested rebuilds upon upgrade? Separate issue,
> separate solution (pkg_pretend maybe?)
@preserved-libs is a horrible hack that is used in pl
On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 4:56 PM, Peter Alfredsen wrote:
> As I said, I would be using slot-deps as ABI-deps. I would find actual
> ABI deps to be vastly more useful since I wouldn't have to keep track
> of earlier slots to block.
>
> Imagine a world with no revdep-rebuild?
>
So you're looking for
On Thu, 9 Apr 2009 16:29:53 +0530
Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> I think the current way is the most easily-supportable way for us.
> Complex interdependencies b/w packages and slots => O(n^k) times bugs,
> where k = no. of slots for a library.
>
> If we don't get all those bugs, it means people are
On N, 2009-04-09 at 11:30 +0200, Tiziano Müller wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, den 09.04.2009, 05:25 +0300 schrieb Mart Raudsepp:
> > Hello,
> >
> >
> > This thread is for any discussion about the slot operator support item
> > in EAPI-3 draft.
> >
> > The premise is good what := and :* allow for, but
On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Peter Alfredsen wrote:
> All package depending on dev-dotnet/gtk-sharp. Although these won't be
> parallel-installable slots, it will really easy the transition between
> versions and allow us to ease the currently quite strict
> interdependencies between the variou
On Thu, 09 Apr 2009 12:03:03 +0200
Rémi Cardona wrote:
> Could anyone actually give a good reason for slot operators? What
> packages would have a _clear_ benefit from using them? I'm asking for
> an actual list of packages, not just some package that may exist in a
> parallel universe.
All pa
Mart Raudsepp a écrit :
Hello,
This thread is for any discussion about the slot operator support item
in EAPI-3 draft.
Could anyone actually give a good reason for slot operators? What
packages would have a _clear_ benefit from using them? I'm asking for an
actual list of packages, not just
Am Donnerstag, den 09.04.2009, 05:25 +0300 schrieb Mart Raudsepp:
> Hello,
>
>
> This thread is for any discussion about the slot operator support item
> in EAPI-3 draft.
>
> The premise is good what := and :* allow for, but I'm concerned about
> the syntax possibly ending up being suboptimal in
13 matches
Mail list logo
