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 5435213827E for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2013 17:48:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 59B84E09BE; Sun, 8 Dec 2013 17:48:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jacques.telenet-ops.be (jacques.telenet-ops.be [195.130.132.50]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34135E092C for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2013 17:48:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from TOMWIJ-GENTOO ([94.226.55.127]) by jacques.telenet-ops.be with bizsmtp id z5oT1m0162khLEN0J5oTaQ; Sun, 08 Dec 2013 18:48:27 +0100 Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2013 18:46:54 +0100 From: Tom Wijsman To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Dependencies default to accept any slot value acceptable (:*), can we default to :0 instead? Message-ID: <20131208184654.664760b7@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> In-Reply-To: <1386523585.12112.5.camel@belkin5> References: <20131208175612.2b8c7e38@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <201312081819.40449.dilfridge@gentoo.org> <1386523585.12112.5.camel@belkin5> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.0 (GTK+ 2.24.22; 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_/LJfiHggC7q=8iN8XKTt+mk0"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: f6587fda-c57f-4420-965e-520fc868c986 X-Archives-Hash: 12ea17befae9d3c657e2508eae93889c --Sig_/LJfiHggC7q=8iN8XKTt+mk0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, 08 Dec 2013 18:26:25 +0100 Pacho Ramos wrote: > El dom, 08-12-2013 a las 18:19 +0100, Andreas K. Huettel escribi=F3: > > Am Sonntag, 8. Dezember 2013, 17:56:12 schrieb Tom Wijsman: > > > > > When our defaults force us down such path, that can't be good and > > > it affects the quality of our Portage tree; so, this makes me > > > wonder, can we change the default from :* to :0? What do you > > > think? > >=20 > > How about changing this in the next EAPI instead? > >=20 > > E.g., in EAPI=3D6, if no slot dependency is given in a dependency > > specification, default to :0=20 >=20 > Other option I have sometimes consider is to force people to specify > the slot dependency on a newer eapi -> if a package is working for > any slot, specify :*, if not, specify the slot that it needs. That > way, this kind of problems would be much less frequent than currently Given that the retroactive change I suggest causes a lot of complexity; changing it on the next EAPI indeed sounds like one way to go, the alternative is to make it a suggestive guideline or policy and cover it as a QA check in repoman. That QA check could throw a warning when a dependency has no slot. -- PS: Sorry for sending the thread mail twice, IMAP timed out; since this is the second time that this happened, I'll pay more attention. --=20 With kind regards, Tom Wijsman (TomWij) Gentoo Developer E-mail address : TomWij@gentoo.org GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D --Sig_/LJfiHggC7q=8iN8XKTt+mk0 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSpLCOAAoJEJWyH81tNOV9wuMH/3SA/6zVdZnliGYDCgrli4y8 rZ+eXkOqDlUyTkfgIbgMNd5vZvJ/Jl0+bojlVyIyFhiepmSdh0NUpUEADQCPiMnI O6B5d4YuE3io3T36JUW5XqoyK2PU996Px8OBcJo3mjPDql26MdfP/tipDMKGqgBl Y5h/tUXid4ymNlJFyltji4j71xDRqMGiIsyLcBKW+WP72TqhYfJbXBd8BmpKZy7z opvpsXMrxF+AayXkQwe9O66tJKKKIhqcppTKNOSM+GPvIZpx3n2eMlhrouCG1L7D /Cnvuffb5Px0ByNYN/cDKP9TredicbFENt0sDPK1gparEpt02YfA2bn8LusUh1I= =JEG6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/LJfiHggC7q=8iN8XKTt+mk0--