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 1574913877A for ; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 05:15:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4F984E08AD; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 05:15:23 +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 3A68BE0C9B for ; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 05:15:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.100] (mobile-internet-5d6a80-173.dhcp.inet.fi [93.106.128.173]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: ssuominen) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D7E9733F616 for ; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 05:15:20 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <53CDF23C.1090007@gentoo.org> Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 08:10:20 +0300 From: Samuli Suominen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 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] don't rely on dynamic deps References: <53CD6BED.10603@gentoo.org> <201407212153.04605.dilfridge@gentoo.org> <20140721225642.56aee8ed@pomiot.lan> <53CD8269.3050808@gentoo.org> <20140721225251.GA22854@linux1> <53CDB8C7.7040106@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <53CDB8C7.7040106@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 561e54da-0a21-452e-87cc-6c30b18d72b0 X-Archives-Hash: 8153b39eb568af64c5e87a489b017704 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. > > Revbump or make dynamic deps actually work (ha). > If they are really as broken people claim, why is the feature enabled by default in the official package manager? As in, why I'm not seeing a bug with title "sys-apps/portage: disable dynamic deps by default" with a Comment #0 listing all the culprits why it should be disabled by default? Or do people think it works well enough, so that it's pros overweight the cons? I do, and many others seem to think so as well.