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 1ErFPq-00084q-MI for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 27 Dec 2005 14:03:03 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id jBRDxZ9K032179; Tue, 27 Dec 2005 13:59:35 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 jBRDucIg010094 for ; Tue, 27 Dec 2005 13:56:38 GMT Received: from zb101200.ppp.dion.ne.jp ([219.125.101.200] helo=opteron246.suzuki-stubbs.home) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.54) id 1ErFL6-0005b9-RZ for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 27 Dec 2005 13:58:09 +0000 Received: by opteron246.suzuki-stubbs.home (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 333EE201AC9; Tue, 27 Dec 2005 22:59:13 +0900 (JST) From: Jason Stubbs To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Multiple Repo Support Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 22:59:12 +0900 User-Agent: KMail/1.9 References: <43A235AD.6030604@leetworks.com> <200512272200.19011.jstubbs@gentoo.org> <200512271445.05776.carlo@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <200512271445.05776.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: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200512272259.12848.jstubbs@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 5da8c780-9ab4-45f9-a541-605f0403aabe X-Archives-Hash: 73e3a43f5fa5588c1fc98c5a609cb94d On Tuesday 27 December 2005 22:45, Carsten Lohrke wrote: > On Tuesday 27 December 2005 14:00, Jason Stubbs wrote: > > If all three of those packages were first built against kdelibs:3.4 and > > then kdelibs:3.5 became available then rebuilding any one of them without > > rebuilding the others will break digikam. I can't see how it's directly > > represented in the metadata unless you want to overload the meaning of > > SLOT. > > It's not possible to represent that via dependencies. What is needed is > some sort of introspection which relevant ebuild is built against which KDE > version and if those _installed_ ebuild:kdever combinations match the one > the _actual_ ebuild to emerge. Do you mind reading and replying to the second paragraph (which happens to be the only new information I brought to this thread). Underlining words to emphasize a point to me that I've opened by agreeing is really not necessary. > But you're right about the overloading of the meaning of slots, because > that's happening right now. Slots are used to install several versions of a > package side by side. The idea Ciaranm and Brian are proposing to lock > ebuilds depending on slotted packages down to a single slot is the > redefinition. And once again: This doesn't match reality. You've misunderstand what is meant by "locking ebuild dependencies". I gave you a definition in my second paragraph. Please have a re-read. -- Jason Stubbs -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list