From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-dev+bounces-66876-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 4E6901391DB
for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Sat, 26 Jul 2014 12:45:06 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 26622E0C46;
Sat, 26 Jul 2014 12:45:02 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-we0-f180.google.com (mail-we0-f180.google.com [74.125.82.180])
(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 34277E0C03
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 26 Jul 2014 12:45:00 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-we0-f180.google.com with SMTP id w61so5340096wes.11
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 26 Jul 2014 05:44:59 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=googlemail.com; s=20120113;
h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:mime-version
:content-type;
bh=PxK+6gcrhVkXHhB4uhl3VMCiASUdxo9szVxkRWIxfZw=;
b=olJ8VGQtd4VoJRJEewqFRM9DgMpEhKDawGwm55R3Yg1RD/CFtFI4MzF1kXK2g0Te96
1+BS7glyo9MvReSnPlpGdZwGfQHdVQLFhRpqYuzrNn2r/cKXVfM/ofuqJQXt/2ze3S+C
f9yCxGGaoo0QOQLL5NsjIaZoeBaQ3Dj7AbGcEXOQ+IxWmA2juOGvWwpY3l2UCefNL4re
/8OLHGOmBr7hrVb3GfOpXK/3wBfVXwNjj4v288dnXwH0fXMXbqV0Gqhp4+VXqeYVT9Sd
/mjYOwTSHV3GZoPeIDx0ttywTsaUnh/e4fFKsBXJ52q/1Zm4BVcKwNFt2W+KBV/u+IeD
E0PA==
X-Received: by 10.180.85.162 with SMTP id i2mr13520093wiz.53.1406378699865;
Sat, 26 Jul 2014 05:44:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (cpc2-broo7-2-0-cust637.14-2.cable.virginm.net. [86.11.186.126])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id u10sm7179009wix.14.2014.07.26.05.44.59
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
(version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
Sat, 26 Jul 2014 05:44:59 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2014 13:44:55 +0100
From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@googlemail.com>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: don't rely on dynamic deps
Message-ID: <20140726134455.44cf518f@googlemail.com>
In-Reply-To: <slrnlt77uj.9i1.martin@epidot.math.uni-rostock.de>
References: <53CD6BED.10603@gentoo.org>
<201407212153.04605.dilfridge@gentoo.org>
<20140721205527.142cb3d5@googlemail.com>
<1405976767.1013.9.camel@gentoo.org>
<20140723143325.031947fb@googlemail.com>
<slrnlt77uj.9i1.martin@epidot.math.uni-rostock.de>
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.3 (GTK+ 2.24.24; 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: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
boundary="Sig_/PTKUL9m+D5jPP3zVTI8pzvG"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
X-Archives-Salt: 5a43d7d9-d9ee-40b6-aa46-a3f7d66652d6
X-Archives-Hash: 3bf55f9316b43bbb3f57e7db37fd6610
--Sig_/PTKUL9m+D5jPP3zVTI8pzvG
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sat, 26 Jul 2014 12:32:20 +0000 (UTC)
Martin Vaeth <martin@mvath.de> wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > User installs foo-1.1-r1
> > Developer makes foo-1.1-r1.1
> > foo-1.1* is removed from the tree
> > User syncs
>=20
> How is this different from your suggestion
> (which you *claim* to be non-broken):
>=20
> User installs foo-1.1-r1
> Developer makes foo-1.1-r2
> foo-1.1* is removed from the tree
> User syncs
>=20
> In fact, the result is completely the same,
> no matter whether you have minor revisions or not,
> and no matter whether you have static or dynamic deps.
>=20
> What is *actually* broken here is that the user
> has installed a package which is not maintained
> anymore: *This* is what needs to be fixed.
> This issue is completely independent of static
> vs. dynamic deps.
> You misuse this problem as a strawman, only.
Uhm. That works just fine... I don't think you understand how this
works: we can always use the metadata that's in VDB for dealing with the
installed package. The issue is that sometimes Portage tries to guess
that it's better to use the metadata from an ebuild instead of what's
in VDB when dealing with an installed package.
--=20
Ciaran McCreesh
--Sig_/PTKUL9m+D5jPP3zVTI8pzvG
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
iEYEARECAAYFAlPToskACgkQ96zL6DUtXhEO0QCfYHphZGpxcPTdmQpVbhgGkBiD
fk4AnjSrs2TEjpMU2YDnxpQGPSHZFG5y
=Nwwh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--Sig_/PTKUL9m+D5jPP3zVTI8pzvG--