From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IrZUq-0002Mi-5J for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 13:38:36 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.2/8.14.0) with SMTP id lACDaFKT030355; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 13:36:15 GMT Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com (nf-out-0910.google.com [64.233.182.184]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.2/8.14.0) with ESMTP id lACDVN8D021423 for ; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 13:31:23 GMT Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id f5so1130610nfh for ; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 05:31:23 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:reply-to:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:message-id:sender; bh=F2XnBXnp7X78f/mvcu8pavqS13rm33juscj1tKOZ8x4=; b=dF2F/p0fN7jIY2MEU3n+q8la+juAIGygKB6vxTjCXMXssVwqo/vQERzSiC8F8Zp7eB59FuUjrb7uBgVvk9VNtqvp5Q1WXvOPFcguadjtRrUoSkvMS30DIpapoef10skXfpYQ0zMPyIsZKXct3JaNnAcThPCGO2b96gLw6FibFhQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:from:reply-to:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:message-id:sender; b=q2DBdAdIaE7U9xAOW4Ud1Giek9uIUIColqB0d888VKTQ6zw6WGZkhIJ/mcY1z2FubMrgygTLIJsyz1JrnixdGwtylJsgJqLY45inGm2071NKCK5G1PnKvSzSaHESuD0EWLJXlpaZESXMLrjrjxqqW5gyW9NlhqRCZpee/AfytqU= Received: by 10.86.76.16 with SMTP id y16mr4622294fga.1194874282449; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 05:31:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from phoebe.lan ( [212.76.57.12]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id d6sm4660775fga.2007.11.12.05.31.20 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 12 Nov 2007 05:31:21 -0800 (PST) From: Piotr =?utf-8?q?Jaroszy=C5=84ski?= To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Phase invariancy and exclusivity requirements Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 14:31:17 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 References: <20071109224008.7f946930@blueyonder.co.uk> <20071111195654.15666780@blueyonder.co.uk> <47384686.8030506@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <47384686.8030506@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: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200711121431.18077.peper@gentoo.org> Sender: =?UTF-8?B?UGlvdHIgSmFyb3N6ecWEc2tp?= X-Archives-Salt: 5578a33f-f15a-4b98-aab9-23dd947ba003 X-Archives-Hash: 0b654499968aa390e2da99e008e1f9e3 On Monday 12 of November 2007 13:26:46 Marijn Schouten (hkBst) wrote: > What exactly is the difference between this valid situation and the > previous invalid one? between | | are things that can be done in parallel. invalid: a_pkg_setup b_pkg_setup a_build b_build | a_merge | b_merge valid: a_pkg_setup b_pkg_setup a_build_binary b_build_binary | a_binary_pkg_setup = |=20 a_binary_merge | b_binary_pkg_setup | b_binary_merge Note that pkg_setup is run twice for the second case, so when the merge ord= er=20 is a then b, b_pkg_setup is aware of the changes that a_merge did, which is= =20 not the case in first situation. =2D-=20 Best Regards, Piotr Jaroszy=C5=84ski -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list