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 64A73138010 for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 22:10:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D1FF221C071; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 22:09:53 +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 D04B721C075 for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 22:08:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: by weyu54 with SMTP id u54so210172wey.40 for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 15:08:37 -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=QjrgFczVZPjerj816RMGqO5s6RxNWBn5GFG7M4K+9eg=; b=tZY+4rO+K1Dh5Bnyc8oT1UvVu4KzI3Go3bid+e7TRs5rSvZ5TUZbwUEX+BzkV+wKVm pt8plqwOf4dOuNG4AvsPGYETHf9QoXgW5OgVMTZOGRCFaapx+0357NdlxJ1LTZFyvBYx kBIB71PUDpAb9134VX24TtCEbRnhDBox/D3jE9Gco9guUnw5jYJWGX4Vi0iDul1KTck7 2Zrrd2RAgMabqP3512Uej3A0Y3bxXa9+Q70tz0GktSe6x7jadBXegeUoiQ1gu/0gsfkf qy6wzoZtPqu8UGwbno/s14THFSKFSrhhgQ8BNbPguOHdCWeTFYKYb6dAApucReQHfqg6 febg== Received: by 10.180.105.6 with SMTP id gi6mr2228259wib.4.1348006116952; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 15:08:36 -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 bc2sm1556342wib.0.2012.09.18.15.08.35 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 18 Sep 2012 15:08:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 23:06:19 +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: <20120918230619.58c30ef9@googlemail.com> In-Reply-To: <20120919000121.52d12484@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> <20120918215355.7ee46043@googlemail.com> <20120918230606.03d994f2@pomiocik.lan> <20120918220843.39868fd0@googlemail.com> <20120918233429.277a4726@pomiocik.lan> <20120918223719.790e1477@googlemail.com> <20120919000121.52d12484@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_/lG9vqdoZFfqB5VU==HRte35"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: dcb0d4cd-c2d3-4f10-b7fa-33b394add7ac X-Archives-Hash: 728dd3055bd4b7f87355ab33d5f0a2a4 --Sig_/lG9vqdoZFfqB5VU==HRte35 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 19 Sep 2012 00:01:21 +0200 Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny wrote: > On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 22:37:19 +0100 > Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 23:34:29 +0200 > > Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny wrote: > > > On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 22:08:43 +0100 > > > Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > > > On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 23:06:06 +0200 > > > > Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny wrote: > > > > > But didn't we already point out that we can't have them in > > > > > RDEPEND since they introduce conflicts? > > > >=20 > > > > You are missing a basic and important part of how dependency > > > > resolution works: currently, cycles consisting purely of > > > > RDEPENDs are ignorable. > > >=20 > > > So, what do we lose? If PDEP comes 'ASAP' officially, I believe > > > that we actually gain RDEPs which can be actually trusted. > >=20 > > "ASAP" is a weaker guarantee that RDEPENDs currently have -- > > RDEPENDs currently have the weakest guarantee necessary to ensure > > that they can be trusted. It's also a useless guarantee, since > > "ASAP" can be arbitrarily late. >=20 > And can't RDEPENDs be arbitrarily late if there is a cycle? No. RDEPENDs have to be available when a package is used to satisfy a dependency. That's the difference between an RDEPEND and a PDEPEND. --=20 Ciaran McCreesh --Sig_/lG9vqdoZFfqB5VU==HRte35 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlBY8F4ACgkQ96zL6DUtXhEGhwCgiEfaKlhwfapBCoImENbjA9gq YqUAn28odrCunynYLFDOL2wLgUE6zGme =HKSf -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/lG9vqdoZFfqB5VU==HRte35--