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 1Er5GV-0002rQ-VF for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 27 Dec 2005 03:12:44 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id jBR3BtXx023614; Tue, 27 Dec 2005 03:11:55 GMT Received: from cubert.e-centre.net (morbo.e-centre.net [66.154.82.3]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id jBR38JqA020311 for ; Tue, 27 Dec 2005 03:08:19 GMT Received: from [10.3.1.19] (helo=barracuda2.stayonline.net) by cubert.e-centre.net with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Er5CF-0006Cl-9a for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Mon, 26 Dec 2005 22:08:19 -0500 X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1135652898-30773-115-0 X-Barracuda-URL: http://10.3.1.19:8000/cgi-bin/mark.cgi Received: from et-pdx-2.site.stayonline.net (unknown [65.200.64.131]) by barracuda2.stayonline.net (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id D8B1768F8C for ; Mon, 26 Dec 2005 22:08:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from nightcrawler ([172.16.1.202]) by et-pdx-2.site.stayonline.net (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id jBR3865j022492 for ; Tue, 27 Dec 2005 03:08:06 GMT Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2005 19:08:16 -0800 From: Brian Harring To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Re: [gentoo-dev] Multiple Repo Support Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Multiple Repo Support Message-ID: <20051227030816.GL5809@nightcrawler.e-centre.net> References: <43A235AD.6030604@leetworks.com> <200512270332.09857.carlo@gentoo.org> <20051227024015.GJ5809@nightcrawler.e-centre.net> <200512270354.47661.carlo@gentoo.org> 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; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="lZZ4ablUVnt2XgAh" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200512270354.47661.carlo@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Virus-Scanned: by Barracuda Spam Firewall at stayonline.net X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: 0.00 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=0.00 using global scores of TAG_LEVEL=1000.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=4.0 tests= X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.02, rules version 3.0.6644 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- X-Archives-Salt: cbfa94dc-26bd-4b21-bad5-078de6518c09 X-Archives-Hash: ef9064b59700125a996a6378b88205b9 --lZZ4ablUVnt2XgAh Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Dec 27, 2005 at 03:54:38AM +0100, Carsten Lohrke wrote: > On Tuesday 27 December 2005 03:40, Brian Harring wrote: > > The version of digikam being merged requires slot=3D3.5- it should be > > depending on libk* slot=3D3.5, also, no? >=20 > No! It (and also its dependencies) can be built against each 3.x slot. >=20 > > As long as the information is represented dependency wise, portage > > should be able to handle it fine. Just need to have that info there. >=20 > It can't be handled dependency wise, because what is interesting is again= st=20 > which KDE version the relevant ebuilds are actually installed. So note the comment in the email you are responding to about locking=20 down the used dep/rdeps for an install. Via that, could lock down the slot it was compiled against. Bit more=20 to it then that, but the concerns your raising *again* are not=20 use/slot based, your pointing at other portage faults (thus please=20 seperate those concerns from use/slot). ~harring --lZZ4ablUVnt2XgAh Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDsLAgvdBxRoA3VU0RAm/8AJ9SQCe0ICKNZDL/gmJxH81EH1L8IwCgg/9k cXFh8f3VhHY9xJG3wK9LkuI= =pKl6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --lZZ4ablUVnt2XgAh-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list