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 CD8711381F3 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 19:13:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EC22CE09B7; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 19:13:02 +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 1C1BEE09AF for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 19:13:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B3FA33E7E1 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 19:13:01 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at gentoo.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.107 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.107 tagged_above=-999 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-1.106, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([IPv6:::ffff:127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [IPv6:::ffff:127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QhPiB3rh3CMS for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 19:12:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D2E5933E256 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 19:12:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1V24UR-00064Z-9G for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 21:12:47 +0200 Received: from 71-17-69-121.yktn.hsdb.sasknet.sk.ca ([71.17.69.121]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 21:12:47 +0200 Received: from dirtyepic by 71-17-69-121.yktn.hsdb.sasknet.sk.ca with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 21:12:47 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Ryan Hill Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: revbumping ebuilds after USE dependency changes Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 13:23:15 -0600 Organization: Gentoo Message-ID: <20130724132315.19acde44@caribou.gateway.2wire.net> References: <20130724124923.GB3010@ion.office.nerd.gr> <20130724153123.GA2892@ion.office.nerd.gr> <51EFF73E.5020604@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: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA512; boundary="Sig_/rZOJ8crAuy5LSacF=fkTe2Z"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 71-17-69-121.yktn.hsdb.sasknet.sk.ca X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 3.9.2-dirty (GTK+ 2.24.20; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) X-Archives-Salt: dd3fd7ef-17e9-4b85-a493-9400db984994 X-Archives-Hash: 799f982a044c2f5412901d2030954c3f --Sig_/rZOJ8crAuy5LSacF=fkTe2Z Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 24 Jul 2013 08:48:14 -0700 ""Pawe=C5=82 Hajdan, Jr."" wrote: > On 7/24/13 8:31 AM, Alex Alexander wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 10:15:51AM -0400, Mike Gilbert wrote: > >> Actually, Portage normally handles this situation gracefully by using > >> the dependencies from the portage tree instead of vdb. However, in the > >> case of a slot-operator dep, it always uses vdb. > >> > >> See bug 477544. > >> > >> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D477544 > >=20 > > Aha, thanks for the bug, missed it. Well, my recommendation is still > > valid until portage gets fixed. Glad to know someone's looking into > > it though. >=20 > Can we get that recommendation to the devmanual possibly? >=20 > I'm still a little bit confused what exactly would warrant such a > revision bump, and why. Revision bumps are necessary when there are changes made to the files that = are installed by a package. That's it. When bumping to EAPI 5 it is recommended to do a rev bump so this sub-slot business can be recorded in the vdb. Are there any others that aren't personal opinion? Course you can do a rev bump for whatever reason you want, but some people = will frown on it unless you have a good reason. eg. if you revbump a stable ebu= ild for a build fix i will spend some time sighing at my screen. --=20 Ryan Hill psn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463 --Sig_/rZOJ8crAuy5LSacF=fkTe2Z Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJR8CmpAAoJEO04vUmVeoRjlcMH/07EDHr9MLaCxNUqei4lXCGr kWS4AGgGJbcycjYFFnRDnCC/UPAQEJnomG/CACbB2jGW6sJWQDnW+hNdACPYpveP RwemYGgP5U99OIH+YJt0zTK9KWbQ2lTggDW66AZzh51ZZwK+bxp7qfDqxH10exui 5sJGuEOsjfEHg15tGUR9leFw7SKYsLdyEDoo5t7k1zBcl9isaHbfUNm51VKZVc0K TGO10Z70L644ULGPa7dXyMcimol3P0MSg+nXldbEslvfDYr9KHxql15rEnN7xa1T 80UQf5qabdA9G4yFPd95ExA2mnZPQLm75MhaD74aYq8KY7NULYFg5TCHZum5Mgg= =7Jpw -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/rZOJ8crAuy5LSacF=fkTe2Z--