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 D145C138010 for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 20:57:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1D2B821C052; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 20:57:26 +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 9C82B21C016 for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 20:56:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: by weyu54 with SMTP id u54so169939wey.40 for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 13:56:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer :mime-version:content-type; bh=pJ4rYzXhfhOm2w5Ha+frYSbX8vFVWVFgeRJ6dcwymZI=; b=AdTi/YjUk8iVum/+NTU3+BbbMUzuY85xiS+HpTz3ImOwzEZ+RfweXL4nj5NDA8dEZe HEKIE/Tv3Zzj0R+7uKbox+V5YlQp6oasArI6i+v9aUZ+GMwEDMwE7cEyU67u+MrWLcmK Qop/KtCX8bK7dRKtJqPG0/ulbDQ5430CEOE6oPs39c/gvyybQeI1KlYSq/JscFnqtHNG YbfGKuAlgDnmh5zcAQXSVyEjqxTOVE1R2Em6rJuUPOKltp1ujgfWhZz4q5gZHP6tv+sp cHW1vFNgeqsbbCdFyos1RrLIZl/A2pfEGrTm9w8YztTGaRnjFW7OnnZesq3PV5Z+TeNR Ygfw== Received: by 10.180.76.69 with SMTP id i5mr1902048wiw.9.1348001774738; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 13:56:14 -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 k2sm1195970wiz.7.2012.09.18.13.56.13 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 18 Sep 2012 13:56:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 21:53:55 +0100 From: Ciaran McCreesh To: =?UTF-8?B?TWljaGHFgiBHw7Nybnk=?= Cc: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP: gentoo sync based unified deps proposal Message-ID: <20120918215355.7ee46043@googlemail.com> In-Reply-To: <20120918225104.567ca679@pomiocik.lan> References: <20120916135211.GC23030@localhost> <20120918102551.500ff19b@pomiocik.lan> <20120918092426.GA5384@localhost> <20568.16682.31115.233591@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <50584559.2000909@gmail.com> <20568.20091.816189.902403@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <5058CAC5.5080706@gentoo.org> <20120918202909.7b238573@googlemail.com> <5058CE43.6000501@gentoo.org> <20120918204433.52af8bcd@googlemail.com> <20120918225104.567ca679@pomiocik.lan> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.1 (GTK+ 2.24.11; 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_/1T=_ebZ4+U8gS8J+ETe3ta1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: c7ccf588-d3de-4aa9-a7d0-1d41c24a4ae3 X-Archives-Hash: e7decdcfe77d9bfc8be0989d7bf328c4 --Sig_/1T=_ebZ4+U8gS8J+ETe3ta1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 22:51:04 +0200 Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny wrote: > On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 20:44:33 +0100 > Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 12:40:51 -0700 > > Zac Medico wrote: > > > On 09/18/2012 12:29 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > > > On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 12:25:57 -0700 > > > > Zac Medico wrote: > > > >> Also, if we change the meaning of RDEPEND in the next EAPI, so > > > >> that it's a hard build-time dep like DEPEND, then > > > >> DEPEND=3D"${RDEPEND} virtual/pkgconfig" can be reduced to > > > >> DEPEND=3D"virtual/pkgconfig". This is what I would like to do for > > > >> the experimental EAPI 5-hdepend which is planned [1]. > > > >=20 > > > > What're we going to do about the zillions of unsolvable cycles > > > > that that would create? (Does Portage detect those and error out > > > > yet?) > > >=20 > > > Yeah, it would be treated just like a DEPEND cycle, which is > > > already detected and treated as a fatal error. As a result, when > > > bumping the EAPI of an ebuild, you may have to migrate some deps > > > from RDEPEND to PDEPEND in order to solve the cycles. > >=20 > > What about the large number of RDEPENDs that are required for a > > package to be usable, but not for it to be installed? >=20 > They will still be RDEPEND, just installed earlier I believe. Except > for those arising conflicts which will have to be moved to PDEP. But > I think Zac said that already. ...but you can't move them to be a PDEPEND, since PDEPENDs aren't guaranteed to be installed when a package is used. --=20 Ciaran McCreesh --Sig_/1T=_ebZ4+U8gS8J+ETe3ta1 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlBY32cACgkQ96zL6DUtXhGmzgCfa6QjddPOS1Ejtf0AM4TqQOZM tJoAnRPSDf9QxpFO7dr4hvi/N9GLeP/t =U+sj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/1T=_ebZ4+U8gS8J+ETe3ta1--