From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LRf9b-0006Qg-AB for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2009 04:02:23 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DABABE04B1; Tue, 27 Jan 2009 04:02:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mta-m3.tc.umn.edu (mta-m3.tc.umn.edu [134.84.135.123]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4679E04B1 for ; Tue, 27 Jan 2009 04:02:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.110] (c-71-63-157-77.hsd1.mn.comcast.net [71.63.157.77]) by mta-m3.tc.umn.edu (UMN smtpd) with ESMTP for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2009 22:02:20 -0600 (CST) X-Umn-Remote-Mta: [N] c-71-63-157-77.hsd1.mn.comcast.net [71.63.157.77] #+TS+AU+HN Message-ID: <497E8714.2090504@gentoo.org> Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 22:01:24 -0600 From: Jeremy Olexa User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20090113) 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 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] slot deps in package.mask and profiles References: <497B8758.9030309@gentoo.org> <20090125210437.1e8b3fed@snowmobile> <20090126172800.GC2928@comet> <497E5F99.2020502@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <497E5F99.2020502@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: d9aca76f-2c36-47f1-88a9-d818927b275b X-Archives-Hash: 166b3dfc54b03ef9ae952d3f58b064dc Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Donnie Berkholz wrote: >> On 21:04 Sun 25 Jan , Ciaran McCreesh wrote: >>> On Sat, 24 Jan 2009 20:25:44 -0100 >>> "Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto" wrote: >>>> I talked to Zac earlier in #gentoo-portage about adding an >>>> entry to package.mask for KDE-4.2.0 using slot deps. Thomas >>>> and Patrick raised the concern we might >>>> need profile eapis and that PMS nailed p.mask to EAPI-0. >>>> Zac confirmed that the first stable version to support slot deps in p. >>>> mask was 2.1.3.16, that it was stabled in bug 197165 - 14 months ago >>>> - - and that the first stages to include it were the 2008.0 stages. >>>> Thus, can we finally give the ok to use slot deps in package.mask? Can >>>> we also give the ok to use it everywhere in all 2008.0 and later >>>> profiles/ ? >>> The Council approved profile eapi files for use a while ago (can't >>> remember when -- http://council.gentoo.org/ isn't being updated), and >> Last month's meeting >> >>> they discussed timeframes for using newer EAPIs then too. Did you see >>> that discussion? >> "An EAPI=0 profile always needs to exist so that users with old portage >> can upgrade. Otherwise they will sync and have no valid profile >> available so cannot emerge a new version of portage. >> >> "Decision: Approved. Existing stable profiles must use EAPI=0. New or dev >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> profiles can use higher EAPIs. > > Acoording to this we will never be able to use slot deps in package.mask > as it's a global file. Given my first mail, can we agree to make EAPI-1 > the minimum EAPI for files under profiles/ ? Can we also create a rule > on how / when to update the minimum EAPI in profiles/ ? So, portage that is unaware of EAPI-1 will just happily ignore the atom and move on..? In that case: Please no! It is hard enough for a base 2007.0 install to be upgraded due to the "portage & bash blocker" (and other issues) - We need to wait much longer for an EAPI bump in a non-new profile (if ever, as Brian Harring suggests - I agree). I know this might seem as a hassle to you but there *are* other entities that provide a base 2007.0 install. Who knows how every group/entity/company/etc use Gentoo.. While I agree that it isn't necessarily our problem, however, we shouldn't make it harder for them or anyone that has a 2007 base install. (We still mirror the 2007.0 stages[1], 2007.0 cds are available[2] for purchase, etc[3] etc[4]). IMO, it would be a dis-service to bump EAPI in a non-new profile for our user-base. I don't see any Pro's besides "easier to type" =/ So, I think the Council decision is appropriate. -Jeremy [1]: http://distfiles.gentoo.org/releases/x86/2007.0/ [2]: http://www.linuxcd.org/view_distro.php?lst=&id_cate=20&id_distro=12 [3]: http://lylix.net/linux-vps-plans [4]: http://www.linode.com/faq.cfm > >> "Ref: http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_930f58fcebcbbcbe523c001f2c825179.xml" >> >> >> I haven't finished & posted last month's summary >> yet because of a >> long holiday vacation and lots of work deadlines after returning. I'll >> get all that stuff updated this week. >>