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 103C113877A for ; Sat, 26 Jul 2014 04:36:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9FF52E0CB8; Sat, 26 Jul 2014 04:36:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C0E5FE0C50 for ; Sat, 26 Jul 2014 04:36:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localnet (packages.gentooexperimental.org [176.9.110.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: patrick) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3AD9D33FD30 for ; Sat, 26 Jul 2014 04:36:42 +0000 (UTC) From: Patrick Lauer To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] don't rely on dynamic deps Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2014 12:36:31 +0800 Message-ID: <2991181.sVC99zFt7G@localhost> User-Agent: KMail/4.13 (Linux/3.15.6-gentoo; KDE/4.13.3; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20140723010615.0df2c4aa@gentoo.org> References: <53CD6BED.10603@gentoo.org> <53CDF23C.1090007@gentoo.org> <20140723010615.0df2c4aa@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-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Archives-Salt: 4ff08162-d764-479d-a8ce-f567ed6da87e X-Archives-Hash: 7ac23699db044c8dd3891355945ada7e On Wednesday 23 July 2014 01:06:15 Tom Wijsman wrote: > On Tue, 22 Jul 2014 08:10:20 +0300 > > Samuli Suominen wrote: > > On 22/07/14 04:05, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote: > > > And just for fun, since no one has mentioned it yet, dynamic deps > > > don't work at all on binpkgs since the Packages file contains the > > > deps (like vardb) and it doesn't get updated (just like vardb). > > > > Known long standing pitfall. It's managable. > > It is one of the reasons I see binpkgs as breaking progress instead of > being part of the progress; it is manageable, but it could be better. > So you'd rather have people not using Gentoo because you can't agilely pivot your strategy mixin? Without binpkg support I'd feel the need to hack it up, just to get things fast enough. It's one of the features that haven't been made popular enough (eh, we could easily provide binpkg-updates for @system for all profiles and the most common arches (amd64, x86, maybe arm) - I've been running a cronjob doing that for x86+amd64 for about a year now) This perspective of "I don't need it, thus it shouldn't exist" is quite ... amusing.