Re: [gentoo-dev] Dependencies that're available at pkg_*inst

[Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@googlemail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1200 bytes --]

On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 18:29:10 -0700
Brian Harring <ferringb@gmail.com> wrote:
> Not all cycles are solvable w/in the domain of execution which is an 
> unfortunate fact.  This loops back into why jstubbs was after use dep 
> cycle breaking (fair bit more fine grained of an issue), a discussion 
> that thus far has been ignored, and the usage of the build flag.

Which, again, is a future thing, since it requires additional per-ebuild
information about how use flags are used to be implementable.

> Stop name dropping labels until you tell folk about what labels are.  
> I know, but I'd rather not have the notion "labels solves all" pushed 
> forth w/ out people knowing what it is, please.

Labels are already documented and discussable in the appropriate place.
This is not supposed to be a discussion about future direction. It's
supposed to be about one specific issue regarding how we word things for
current implementations. The two wordings in the original email do not
have equivalent implications, and selecting the correct one affects
whether certain problems are solvable. Let's discuss that, not what
we're going to do six years from now.

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]