From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1QDeN7-0004ru-FO for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 23 Apr 2011 15:03:45 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DD2551C015; Sat, 23 Apr 2011 15:03:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wy0-f181.google.com (mail-wy0-f181.google.com [74.125.82.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23FE71C110 for ; Sat, 23 Apr 2011 15:02:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wyi11 with SMTP id 11so1232549wyi.40 for ; Sat, 23 Apr 2011 08:02:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to :references:x-mailer:mime-version:content-type; bh=IJTIu2fsISBpRQG5EftwkeXRGbipuSPlZ4oIMwh7ono=; b=QyvKbCeUj+PIUeuiNWdOy3pdQALr/zj2lXuJQ5WJcNhtgy7J0cFujjOyLkLTfEQ+NK iq1We3wXaMdjYX43wU2soh770C3NDSEf28+se5ilWl7/WsSDpYaCvBDb3aHWAz2Mq1oO DY3bfHcYa3DLil/uPDDlHSNXQREs7hrHaAr7A= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer :mime-version:content-type; b=dEvLOUA+QlZnmN7Ji+p8clPM4l3fpP8fOfcJcTzsn3nqaAJ+Z8WOo17rQjf/NF/WGv tOS4LCuGcIDo7HjsvMzuxykYMZcqnZpgh/rL6AoMaSgR35dIF1Y0L6YM7A+r0NLpYOtt Htevy6CpdaS1nYXB23mZiTTu9B/UHWm6pWi8c= Received: by 10.216.142.230 with SMTP id i80mr2175762wej.1.1303570965320; Sat, 23 Apr 2011 08:02:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (cpc1-broo3-0-0-cust98.14-2.cable.virginmedia.com [86.4.208.99]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id d54sm1822794wej.34.2011.04.23.08.02.44 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sat, 23 Apr 2011 08:02:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2011 15:57:24 +0100 From: Ciaran McCreesh To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] reconciling new-style virtuals with overlays, was: RDEPENDing on packages from overlays? Message-ID: <20110423155724.040acfc0@googlemail.com> In-Reply-To: <4DB2E689.3010609@gentoo.org> References: <4DB26C3C.8090602@gentoo.org> <4DB2A9CD.7010708@gentoo.org> <20110423123235.1d618818@googlemail.com> <4DB2D3E4.9080005@gentoo.org> <20110423143709.4aa18f6a@googlemail.com> <4DB2E689.3010609@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.6 (GTK+ 2.22.1; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA1; boundary="Sig_/KXIJn7lq/NQ9Gw4hvSqNFaw"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: ea827690420448a89c2958b0e9d1ad7d --Sig_/KXIJn7lq/NQ9Gw4hvSqNFaw Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, 23 Apr 2011 16:47:37 +0200 Ch=C3=AD-Thanh Christopher Nguy=E1=BB=85n wrote: > What I propose solves the problems that old-style virtuals introduce > in dependency resolution. Not really, because it means we'd have to keep the nasty old code around forever. If we just do away with the things entirely instead then we can pretend they never existed (like we did for ? : dependencies). > What other problems do they cause? DEPEND=3D">=3Dvirtual/blah-2" DEPEND=3D"virtual/blah[foo]" DEPEND=3D"!virtual/that-i-provide" PROVIDE=3D"not-a/virtual" best_version virtual/blah The full VDB load required to figure out whether or not a virtual is installed. --=20 Ciaran McCreesh --Sig_/KXIJn7lq/NQ9Gw4hvSqNFaw Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAk2y6NcACgkQ96zL6DUtXhFgkwCeIeQsW8W3S+iSTro7smv7N25/ yAcAn0DAp1bJQR/3kks6SVpc2PfRBhX5 =/lw7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/KXIJn7lq/NQ9Gw4hvSqNFaw--