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 1FDlND-0001Aa-W4 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 27 Feb 2006 16:37:24 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id k1RGZjC1011626; Mon, 27 Feb 2006 16:35:45 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 k1RGXS5n009472 for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2006 16:33:28 GMT Received: from [213.121.151.206] (helo=snowdrop.home) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.54) id 1FDlJP-0000Bt-Q1 for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Mon, 27 Feb 2006 16:33:27 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=snowdrop.home) by snowdrop.home with esmtp (Exim 4.54) id 1FDlJK-0002ar-Id for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Mon, 27 Feb 2006 16:33:22 +0000 Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 16:33:19 +0000 From: Ciaran McCreesh To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] SRC_URI component naming collision Message-ID: <20060227163319.7f81cd6a@snowdrop.home> In-Reply-To: <200602271103.05384.pauldv@gentoo.org> References: <20060224141940.16864042@snowdrop.home> <1140989422.12229.72.camel@demandred.gnqs.org> <20060226214011.13636962@snowdrop.home> <200602271103.05384.pauldv@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.0.0 (GTK+ 2.8.12; i686-pc-linux-gnu) 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="Sig_Z7jW67=EjU91a1c=kq0IdO2"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=PGP-SHA1 X-Archives-Salt: 8b237934-c6a5-4afe-884f-61a523abceea X-Archives-Hash: f90808cbe551c12ce09361c627cc10fe --Sig_Z7jW67=EjU91a1c=kq0IdO2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 11:02:57 +0100 Paul de Vrieze wrote: | On Sunday 26 February 2006 22:40, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | > The issue is whether you have the right to leave broken packages in | > the tree. I don't see any policy document granting you that right. |=20 | The general consensus over the years has been that if something | cannot be fixed due to portage problems, then we do what necessary to | warn users about it, but keep the package. In this regard also look | at various dependency cycles, and/or use flag dependencies. The general consensus has been to implement the best available workaround, if one is doable, and just remove the thing where it's not. --=20 Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Wearer of the shiny hat) Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm --Sig_Z7jW67=EjU91a1c=kq0IdO2 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFEAynS96zL6DUtXhERAtZGAKDnbjxnXRyEW4BfA9llcMiduJWf3gCgn0ub olhJ/CWTWLVRicjS5Sg5KbY= =o3i8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_Z7jW67=EjU91a1c=kq0IdO2-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list