From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1ScC2F-0000P1-QS for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 06 Jun 2012 08:56:13 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CD507E065A; Wed, 6 Jun 2012 08:55:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AE09E0676 for ; Wed, 6 Jun 2012 08:54:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.26.2] (ip98-164-193-252.oc.oc.cox.net [98.164.193.252]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: zmedico) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D947E1B4037 for ; Wed, 6 Jun 2012 08:54:57 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4FCF1ADE.5010502@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2012 01:54:54 -0700 From: Zac Medico User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120506 Thunderbird/12.0.1 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] [gentoo-portage-dev] About forcing rebuilds of other packages issue References: <1338845178.23212.1.camel@belkin4> <4FCDFF18.3080600@gentoo.org> <4FCEA99E.4090700@gentoo.org> <4FCEBDD9.8000604@gentoo.org> <1338972375.2706.23.camel@belkin4> In-Reply-To: <1338972375.2706.23.camel@belkin4> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5pre Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 42e59528-c33d-4f69-a3e8-5e08b4e77c59 X-Archives-Hash: dd1b1c3419eed8132f1bdc2ff57cfd7d -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 06/06/2012 01:46 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote: > El mar, 05-06-2012 a las 19:18 -0700, Zac Medico escribi=C3=B3: >> On 06/05/2012 05:51 PM, Michael Weber wrote: >>> Is there any chance to detect this ZLIB_VERSION problem with=20 >>> revdep-rebuild (worst case: add a list of possibly broken >>> packages with tests)? >>=20 >> I'd suggest a special ebuild phase to check for ABI changes, like >> the pre_pkg_preinst_abi_check phase suggested here: >>=20 >> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D192319#c20 >=20 > I guess, that phase would detect ABI change and package manager > would know how to handle it by itself? Yeah, it would be like a warning system, do detect cases when the SLOT/ABI_SLOT were not bumped when they should have been. The idea is that the developer who's doing the version bump will see the warning and bump the SLOT/ABI_SLOT before committing the ebuild. - --=20 Thanks, Zac -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk/PGt4ACgkQ/ejvha5XGaMt8QCffullYkU7EQXeE7TeUri4nQya ysIAoMhPQT+rEZbxKNvMiX8qNOEndiM1 =3DV7Tz -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----