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 27F57138010 for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 20:53:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5C2DD21C04C; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 20:52:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 927A421C039 for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 20:51:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pomiocik.lan (77-254-69-147.adsl.inetia.pl [77.254.69.147]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mgorny) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 062BC33CBE3; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 20:51:03 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 22:51:04 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?TWljaGHFgiBHw7Nybnk=?= To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Cc: ciaran.mccreesh@googlemail.com Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP: gentoo sync based unified deps proposal Message-ID: <20120918225104.567ca679@pomiocik.lan> In-Reply-To: <20120918204433.52af8bcd@googlemail.com> 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> Organization: Gentoo X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.1 (GTK+ 2.24.12; 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-SHA256; boundary="Sig_/AMlzLJHOumi/KovHrgmqU2X"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: 617b096b-e240-4507-86c9-df15b7424705 X-Archives-Hash: 4c784c545e5298cb05e7cfec0b0d1c3f --Sig_/AMlzLJHOumi/KovHrgmqU2X Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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? 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. --=20 Best regards, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny --Sig_/AMlzLJHOumi/KovHrgmqU2X Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iJwEAQEIAAYFAlBY3rkACgkQfXuS5UK5QB3dTgQAqjuhsD9vpzaRbS9i3CwB5VWW doCzyWTPkag1uOuTC46UssUIn+O+Ig5nJpwfYQQLIFXdg/BqC51fYS+9tGhMBvhM tgQGWZDB7YkprIepVNG5PfDA2uPoSxP0/QDHBQbAVWlwznMQWeqG2Ets7oeCCFEq JYSXxVJDKAUtSJNhd4M= =03GQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/AMlzLJHOumi/KovHrgmqU2X--