From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JDKPt-00050x-MU for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 13:59:25 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5CBADE09E9; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 13:46:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.salomon.at (smtp.salomon.at [193.186.16.13]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08CD7E09E9 for ; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 13:46:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from servex01.wamas.com (servex01.salomon.at [172.28.2.2]) by smtp.salomon.at (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id m0BDkc0i010713 for ; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 14:46:38 +0100 (MET) Received: from [172.28.8.78] ([172.28.8.78]) by servex01.wamas.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 11 Jan 2008 14:46:38 +0100 Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Reducing the size of the system package set From: Michael Haubenwallner To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <200801101432.00880.vapier@gentoo.org> References: <1199831824.8108.19.camel@inertia.twi-31o2.org> <1199979761.26648.20.camel@sapc154> <200801101432.00880.vapier@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 14:46:37 +0100 Message-Id: <1200059197.12879.15.camel@sapc154> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.10.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Jan 2008 13:46:38.0200 (UTC) FILETIME=[636CF780:01C85458] X-Spam-Info: -0.73 () ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_50,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.54 on 172.28.2.13 X-Archives-Salt: ad43f80b-b0ce-4133-9961-06824bfa9a77 X-Archives-Hash: 398bd3fbc21b7bc3940ef4e8ed747882 On Thu, 2008-01-10 at 14:32 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Thursday 10 January 2008, Michael Haubenwallner wrote: > > On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 14:37 -0800, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > > > Implicit dependencies waste more time than pretty much anything else. > > > Almost all circular dependency issues we currently have are due to > > > implicit dependencies. > > > > Maybe OT (an idea in a very early state): > > > > For the implicit dependencies one could think of path-sandbox to help: > > > > Inform libsandbox which files are provided by packages both in *DEPEND > > and the system package set, and let it completely deny access to > > not-listed files. > > > > Or let it report any access to not-listed files to help finding the > > implicit dependencies. > > it'd be quite some time before this would see implementation, but can you > summarize the ideas and open a feature request in bugzilla please done: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=205312 /haubi/ -- Michael Haubenwallner Gentoo on a different level -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list