From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 23015139694 for ; Thu, 2 Mar 2017 15:14:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4BB75E0C3D; Thu, 2 Mar 2017 15:14:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 09108E0BFE for ; Thu, 2 Mar 2017 15:14:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2a01:e34:eeaa:6bd0:d88f:6e70:f472:d13a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: aballier) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 93D9F34171F for ; Thu, 2 Mar 2017 15:14:17 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2017 16:14:09 +0100 From: Alexis Ballier To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] new virtual -- virtual/go to fix go build time dependencies Message-ID: <20170302161409.6c8b9259@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <20170302145637.51df7c0d@snowblower> References: <20170302001801.GA29649@whubbs1.gaikai.biz> <20170302105854.189f1f88@gentoo.org> <135e77dc-c443-8dd3-185b-71e743a4b700@gentoo.org> <9049c20c-e5b2-c554-9211-2da7eef055df@gentoo.org> <20170302145637.51df7c0d@snowblower> Organization: Gentoo X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.14.1 (GTK+ 2.24.31; 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: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 0e3d8f71-65bb-4582-bdad-2bb40a44ef58 X-Archives-Hash: 3e0c315cb787070f56438dc361864a0e On Thu, 2 Mar 2017 14:56:37 +0000 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Thu, 2 Mar 2017 09:47:35 -0500 > Michael Orlitzky wrote: > > On 03/02/2017 09:24 AM, Mike Gilbert wrote: > > >> > > >> In other words, the ":=" only does something special in RDEPEND. > > >> That makes sense when you think of it as meaning "the thing will > > >> break" rather than "I want to do a rebuild." The only reason it's > > >> not an error to put them in DEPEND is because it would annoy > > >> everyone doing DEPEND="${RDEPEND}". > > > > > > Portage has interesting behavior for ":=" in DEPEND: it varies > > > depending on your "with-bdeps" setting. > > > > > > > This is why we can't have nice things. > > Actually you can't have nice things because the labels proposal was > voted down for "being invented by the wrong people". Don't get too much into conspiracy theories, I think it has been dismissed because it would require rewriting every dependency and there has not been any portage implementation afaik. Instead of that, people seem to prefer having [A-Z]DEPEND :)