Re: [gentoo-dev] [OT] pkgcore bikeshed (was Portage team)

[Luis Ressel <aranea@aixah.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1511 bytes --]

On Mon, 13 Jan 2014 16:46:08 +0100
Tom Wijsman <TomWij@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Mon, 13 Jan 2014 16:38:59 +0100
> Luis Ressel <aranea@aixah.de> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 13 Jan 2014 15:58:13 +0100
> > Tom Wijsman <TomWij@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > Half a minute if you disable backtracking which you don't need. :)
> > 
> > Which sadly also means that some updates get skipped silently.
> > (Those which would trigger rebuilds of other packages because of
> > sub-slot deps, had that case yesterday).
> 
> Can you give an example of that?
> 
> Rebuilds don't cause a different solution in the graph afaik; so, I
> wouldn't see how that would form a big problem. I also think this
> would still be covered by preserved-rebuild and/or revdep-rebuild
> afterwards.

No, the problem wasn't that rebuilds weren't done (btw: this is not
about @preserved-rebuilds, but about subslot dependencies), but that
updates which would trigger such rebuilds are silently ignored. This
happened to me yesterday while trying --backtrack=0. The available
update to dev-haskell/parsec simply didn't show up (haskell ebuilds
make heavy use of subslot deps), I only noticed this because I knew
there was in fact an update available (thanks to eix-diff). Only after
enabling backtracking Portage found the update.

This might well be a bug, perhaps I'll examine the situation when I've
got more time.


-- 
Luis Ressel <aranea@aixah.de>
GPG fpr: F08D 2AF6 655E 25DE 52BC  E53D 08F5 7F90 3029 B5BD

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 966 bytes --]