From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-dev+bounces-66201-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
	by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C68413877A
	for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Sat, 14 Jun 2014 15:51:50 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 674D1E0AE0;
	Sat, 14 Jun 2014 15:51:46 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7459FE0AC2
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 14 Jun 2014 15:51:45 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from rook (unknown [96.241.16.8])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	(Authenticated sender: tetromino)
	by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6DA0933FE5F
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 14 Jun 2014 15:51:44 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <1402761029.16949.1.camel@rook>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Subslots: should they be bumped like SONAME or on
 any ABI changes?
From: Alexandre Rostovtsev <tetromino@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2014 11:50:29 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20140614161341.6cc4c2fa@googlemail.com>
References: <20140614164151.45afb5ca@pomiot.lan>
	 <20140614161341.6cc4c2fa@googlemail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature";
	boundary="=-X7l4RYb+YddZa1ZMJTJ3"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.3 
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Archives-Salt: 5f2c4fe5-30e2-4043-b04c-74e61032837d
X-Archives-Hash: b00e8482fb28e10be74ac86465dbf739


--=-X7l4RYb+YddZa1ZMJTJ3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, 2014-06-14 at 16:13 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Jun 2014 16:41:51 +0200
> Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > However, this means that we force much more rebuilds than necessary.
>=20
> This shouldn't be considered to be a problem.

This would be suicide for Gentoo as a distro. Organizations that have a
dedicated build server and a standardized /etc/portage config tree
pushed to all user machines could rebuild half of @world once a week.
Individual users running Gentoo on a single workstation or server can't
and won't.

--=-X7l4RYb+YddZa1ZMJTJ3
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
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=1MpV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=-X7l4RYb+YddZa1ZMJTJ3--