Re: [gentoo-dev] Subslots: should they be bumped like SONAME or on any ABI changes?

[Patrick Lauer <patrick@gentoo.org>]

On Saturday 14 June 2014 11:50:29 Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote:
> On Sat, 2014-06-14 at 16:13 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Sat, 14 Jun 2014 16:41:51 +0200
> > 
> > Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > > However, this means that we force much more rebuilds than necessary.
> > 
> > This shouldn't be considered to be a problem.
> 
> This would be suicide for Gentoo as a distro. Organizations that have a
> dedicated build server and a standardized /etc/portage config tree
> pushed to all user machines could rebuild half of @world once a week.
> Individual users running Gentoo on a single workstation or server can't
> and won't.

Well, you have to rebuild half of everything anyway. (And if you don't want to 
do that - update less often)

Last updates on my notebook had on average half a dozen packages needing to be 
rebuilt due to preserved-libs. 

How is that better than automated rebuilds that actually reduce the 
interaction I have with that machine?


I'd strongly prefer a coherent policy for this whole library versioning 
situation, maybe per-library (so instead of forcing everything to use subslots 
we say "all consumers of this lib have to, and ignore others for now)