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 F323613877A for ; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 09:50:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A894AE0ACA; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 09:50:26 +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 B1A55E0A4F for ; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 09:50:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.0.3] (107.4.189.109.customer.cdi.no [109.189.4.107]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: bernalex) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4FBDF33FB4C for ; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 09:50:24 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <53CE33DC.5010700@gentoo.org> Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 11:50:20 +0200 From: Alexander Berntsen 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] Re: don't rely on dynamic deps References: <53CD6BED.10603@gentoo.org> <201407212153.04605.dilfridge@gentoo.org> <20140721205527.142cb3d5@googlemail.com> <1405976767.1013.9.camel@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: bc0c73ca-88b8-41ab-9371-81d198a23509 X-Archives-Hash: 48718020b334659ea146755203dd4b9f -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 22/07/14 09:39, Martin Vaeth wrote: > Pacho Ramos wrote: >> >> Maybe this could be solved by having two kinds of revisions: - >> One would rebuild all as usually (for example, -r1...) - The >> other one would only regenerate VDB and wouldn't change the >> installed files (for example, -r1.1) > > I made the same suggestion already on the corresponding bug > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=516612#c33 without any > response. Martin, I have no arguments against your idea to tell the PM that "this bump only changes dependencies". My initial reaction is that this is a Good Thing. Would you like to try to implement it? - -- Alexander bernalex@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iF4EAREIAAYFAlPOM9wACgkQRtClrXBQc7WV1AD+LbojEp7TVY51WobwTflCPzQK wZbmGWiyyBhylG7AgWIBAJRKURylzKxjPWcmjGwllf2CXcublXZCmndzbHeoTm0B =doak -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----