Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] More reliable hiding preserved libraries

[Brian Harring <ferringb@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1347 bytes --]

On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 03:27:34PM +0200, Tiziano MMMller wrote:
> > Via that, the resolver can see that a rebuild is necessary and plan a 
> > rebuild of all consumers (whether NEEDED based or revdep).  Note 
> > preserve-lib would be rather useful here- specifically holding onto 
> > the intermediate lib while doing rebuilding.
>
> No, it doesn't help since you may have the same problems some people try
> to solve in this thread.

Might I suggest in the future purning down what you're responding to, 
to just that blurb?  At first read of your response I thought you were 
arguing against the ABI var itself (which didn't make a helluva lot of 
sense).

Meanwhile, yes, using preserve lib there still has some issues- the 
reason I mentioned it possibly being held onto is that if we're 
talking about something like openssl, having your system be horked for 
the intervening period isn't a great thing thus it may be useful as an 
option at the least.

> >   This however breaks down 
> > a bit when the ABI change is in reverse of normal versioning.
> How so? Such a var should just specify the ABI and the PM only has to
> check whether it changed from one PVR to the other. The "how" is
> completely irrelevant.

That comment is in reference to if preserve-lib is still enabled for 
the rebuild.

~harring

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]