From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.54) id 1Er4CV-0007sD-4v for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 27 Dec 2005 02:04:31 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id jBR23nnl019324; Tue, 27 Dec 2005 02:03:49 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id jBR21Kvx007669 for ; Tue, 27 Dec 2005 02:01:21 GMT Received: from d134058.adsl.hansenet.de ([80.171.134.58] helo=iglu.bnet.local) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.54) id 1Er49Q-0003t0-Et for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 27 Dec 2005 02:01:20 +0000 From: Carsten Lohrke To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Multiple Repo Support Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 03:01:13 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9 References: <43A235AD.6030604@leetworks.com> <200512262109.39704.carlo@gentoo.org> <20051227012908.GF5809@nightcrawler.e-centre.net> In-Reply-To: <20051227012908.GF5809@nightcrawler.e-centre.net> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1456013.RotaAniq7T"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200512270301.20576.carlo@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 74edb33e-e357-4a8c-95f2-68d814189f97 X-Archives-Hash: 6a0b48c85770329d3aece950a7a11fc2 --nextPart1456013.RotaAniq7T Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Tuesday 27 December 2005 02:29, Brian Harring wrote: > So... basically, your concern is with the resolver, not use/slot deps > syntax. I did not say that this would have anything to do with the syntax. Am I ri= ght=20 to extract from your words that we get rid of ~arch users complains about=20 up/downgrade cycles with Portage 2.1 as well, but have them confronted with= a=20 proper error message!? :) > > - The dependencies we have are always >=3Dkde-libs/kde-x.y and when KDE= 4 > > is due, we can change to =3Dkde-libs/kde-3.5* because everything else w= on't > > be supported anymore. So unless I miss something, kde-libs/kde:X is > > superfluous. > > Missing something /me thinks. > shouldn't really be specifying >=3Dkde-x.y; should be specifying the > slotting. Do that, and you wouldn't have to go back and change it > over to =3Dkde-libs/kde-3.5* ; you just mark the new kde-4 as a > different slot. Of course slot dependencies are cleaner. Just that they don't address a=20 practical problem with ebuilds buildable against multiple slotted ebuilds o= f=20 one packages, but the need to have them, their dependencies and all other=20 ebuilds depending on the latter (ones [sp?]) built against one and the same= =20 ebuild ( In reality a set of ebuilds, named KDE X.Y). Carsten --nextPart1456013.RotaAniq7T Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2-ecc0.1.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBDsKBwVwbzmvGLSW8RAkrCAJ0e8bnAXaORCi6GzaJlmDErJGYIOACbBkn+ dheZCTNaBm5dKG5Si6+xx4w= =EF+g -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1456013.RotaAniq7T-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list