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 1ScKph-0003pj-JU for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 06 Jun 2012 18:19:49 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C0FEDE0527; Wed, 6 Jun 2012 18:19:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-we0-f181.google.com (mail-we0-f181.google.com [74.125.82.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66B3B21C053 for ; Wed, 6 Jun 2012 18:18:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: by werj55 with SMTP id j55so5169609wer.40 for ; Wed, 06 Jun 2012 11:18:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer :mime-version:content-type; bh=wHYHT4PhYoKh2H8NnbZ/EwEpr6iNBGm9YqAFzToUL7M=; b=trlKLFVhq5+mXPw+YzWJl2akTUzl657eyKTDDXMU6A8kOXEA+A9HZa+Gu4t9QmxASp TGOx+oDZt9bEDXJMSxcLmNRcSSQRxZjVnzjhgJX8bPx9I9ONjSubxBJWUMQg69F/sm5I Ej6DdXJX/OkM0KFNGBj0jPf2gKHwYGtK3pv0/HsTWy9bTH6etP26Fgajs47IZXw0NlGT ufKWZgydMUs9+mSjKct3aaHdizwZzWLZO+xs6jW9glRNZ0RSm4Gj5aae1XnE+nJkcke0 nVzeCfmiTu8L9t+mkm+tOBApaR0+GYb351Sjmhx24VkNGj93MWy8yMs0DFbMXeUHuieH ioHg== Received: by 10.216.225.230 with SMTP id z80mr18224937wep.182.1339006704549; Wed, 06 Jun 2012 11:18:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (cpc13-broo7-2-0-cust130.14-2.cable.virginmedia.com. [82.9.16.131]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id hv7sm1728547wib.0.2012.06.06.11.18.23 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 06 Jun 2012 11:18:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2012 19:15:05 +0100 From: Ciaran McCreesh To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] About forcing rebuilds of other packages issue Message-ID: <20120606191505.4e011158@googlemail.com> In-Reply-To: <1339005744.2706.47.camel@belkin4> References: <1338845178.23212.1.camel@belkin4> <4FCDFF18.3080600@gentoo.org> <1338903062.21833.7.camel@belkin4> <4FCE913C.5060104@gentoo.org> <1338971313.2706.4.camel@belkin4> <4FCF2012.3040500@gentoo.org> <1338976106.2706.36.camel@belkin4> <20120606181650.0c727f18@googlemail.com> <1339005744.2706.47.camel@belkin4> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.0 (GTK+ 2.24.10; 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_/LNrDLkw.ojPiXHr2VsuDt0X"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: 34f4dd47-428c-451b-8c77-803482891128 X-Archives-Hash: e0f4fc1cc873d2b598452e6c5974628c --Sig_/LNrDLkw.ojPiXHr2VsuDt0X Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 06 Jun 2012 20:02:24 +0200 Pacho Ramos wrote: > Probably other gnome team could reply this better than me, but I don't > think slotting every glib-2 due ABI changes deserves the huge effort. Think of the users. > Also, we want people to rebuild them against, for example, glib-2.32 > ABI, not to keep glib-2.30 and 2.32 installed in parallel and some > packages built against 2.30 and others against 2.32. Well, you can do that if you really want... > Also, how could this be handled in dbus-glib side? I mean, would we > need to update dbus-glib update from RDEPENDing on glib:2.30 to > glib:2.32? :O Noooooo. You'd use :=3D dependencies, possibly with a >=3D constraint. --=20 Ciaran McCreesh --Sig_/LNrDLkw.ojPiXHr2VsuDt0X Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAk/PniwACgkQ96zL6DUtXhHtkQCfXfIXZniLLiTk1zWOKVvjZDKu 9f0AniyJk8pr4j/zBYLDHUJ7nmJwtiO9 =it9o -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/LNrDLkw.ojPiXHr2VsuDt0X--