From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-dev+bounces-58392-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
	by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A18B138982
	for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 00:45:23 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C59CC21C0FC;
	Mon, 11 Feb 2013 00:45:19 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C152A21C036
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 00:45:18 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (pc-103-46-101-190.cm.vtr.net [190.101.46.103])
	(using SSLv3 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	(Authenticated sender: aballier)
	by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9B18E33E49F
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 00:45:15 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2013 21:45:10 -0300
From: Alexis Ballier <aballier@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: On the good usage of subslots
Message-ID: <20130210214510.32e1e6a4@gentoo.org>
In-Reply-To: <kf5lav$3h0$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <20130209091503.1f75352d@gentoo.org>
	<kf5g08$ns1$1@ger.gmane.org>
	<20130209095218.34fb59e0@gentoo.org>
	<kf5lav$3h0$1@ger.gmane.org>
Organization: Gentoo
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.0 (GTK+ 2.24.14; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
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-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Archives-Salt: 9f9e9179-3b96-4eb6-9c06-43faf7df401d
X-Archives-Hash: f6cc826d4b161d9e6c7dd1082a6bfa03

On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 01:09:38 +1100
Michael Palimaka <kensington@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On 9/02/2013 23:52, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> > On Sat, 09 Feb 2013 23:38:35 +1100
> > Michael Palimaka <kensington@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >
> >> I even noticed some maintainers adding subslots dependencies on
> >> libraries that do not yet define subslots. This too seems
> >> reasonable, given that there would be no impact until the library
> >> defines a (sensible) subslot in the future.
> >
> > By the way, this could also be discussed: I did not check, but as
> > far as I understand it subslot is equal to slot if not defined.
> > When said library defines a subslot, the subslot will change and
> > thus triggers a (likely useless) rebuild of your package setting
> > a := dep.
> >
> > Alexis.
> >
> >
> 
> Yeah. This behaviour can be avoided by introducing the explicit
> subslot only when the subslot would otherwise need bumping.

I would not count on that as this would mean extra care has to be taken
when adding a subslot.

Alexis.