From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0CA5138010 for ; Tue, 11 Sep 2012 02:18:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B3352E07BE; Tue, 11 Sep 2012 02:17:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ie0-f181.google.com (mail-ie0-f181.google.com [209.85.223.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE54CE07B3 for ; Tue, 11 Sep 2012 02:16:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ieak12 with SMTP id k12so3498iea.40 for ; Mon, 10 Sep 2012 19:16:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=GMrAHAkokP4p1HV0Oyg43sBdCPt3Kby5YeAW8IQB5L8=; b=BO+HHzl8v98c/l/t4rM6EHWWyPag34m4HtUwnwHnT0EVIZGL4iB43UGW6rFgCp5FQb 38xGLMlw5ByaBQe78znUAsO1r0yil08yLzDEjXdHLoVQolOERyvAxtN4+v9TLaWfmi0v HQhMY6oYc58sS5k7tGZE/35XjDQULjBgEKrgTDo8IU6SolpWqwZpLZgYuBk4jvBC1JLa CvZQyJfBIjclXhic4359isZeBqJGALp9YgzHLxzZbPrSpiD3AVrJqCpsK9wwlYrIlM8D yVrLRshvIuHg3XrKI36MAAT9KJqQtWQIWdJwPyiyTYGFogr5KcM2rK029Wt/EzZu5uqI PMKA== Received: by 10.50.192.138 with SMTP id hg10mr14060088igc.30.1347329769223; Mon, 10 Sep 2012 19:16:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.gmail.com:587 (74-95-192-101-SFBA.hfc.comcastbusiness.net. [74.95.192.101]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id in10sm29434igc.14.2012.09.10.19.16.06 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 10 Sep 2012 19:16:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by smtp.gmail.com:587 (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 10 Sep 2012 19:16:17 -0700 Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 19:16:17 -0700 From: Brian Harring To: axs@gentoo.org Cc: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Unified DEPENDENCIES concept Message-ID: <20120911021617.GE8036@localhost> References: <20120907124559.68a1b88d@googlemail.com> <20120907124641.0135693d@gentoo.org> <20120907180351.4e682fd5@pomiocik.lan> <20120907144025.06b3d1eb@gentoo.org> <20120907202103.671d98b1@pomiocik.lan> <20120907165948.2dbe3fdd@gentoo.org> <20120907221051.4a7a6bde@pomiocik.lan> <504A5599.7060506@gentoo.org> 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: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <504A5599.7060506@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Archives-Salt: 8765d672-6184-4b7c-a770-46d8d3f95294 X-Archives-Hash: bce31fce72d6049f9998c29b18e52828 On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 04:14:17PM -0400, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: > Is there anything in particular in the spec/proposal for DEPENDENCIES > that would exclude the addition of individual "build: app-cat/myatom" > "run: app-cat/myatom" deps by an eclass or eclasses? I know the > "goal" here is to make things atom-centric, but I can't see an > implementation ever working of this that wouldn't permit the "pile-on" > of additional entries of different (or even the same) roles on > identical or near-identical atoms. They could be piled on; it would require each eclass to reset the label for safety reasons though; same goes for ebuilds frankly (or the PM would have to reset the context to build+run: each time through). Pardon if addressed elsewhere; this thread is a fucking mess... ~harring