From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-dev+bounces-66808-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
	by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2447613877A
	for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Fri, 25 Jul 2014 14:44:58 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C448BE1A82;
	Fri, 25 Jul 2014 14:44:50 +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 BA458E1A36
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 25 Jul 2014 14:44:49 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [192.168.1.195] (CPE002401f30b73-CM78cd8ec1b205.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com [99.224.181.112])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	(Authenticated sender: axs)
	by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A785833FFB1
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 25 Jul 2014 14:44:48 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <53D26D58.3000004@gentoo.org>
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 10:44:40 -0400
From: Ian Stakenvicius <axs@gentoo.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
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>	<20140721205527.142cb3d5@googlemail.com>	<1405976767.1013.9.camel@gentoo.org>	<53CE6CED.1060300@gentoo.org> <20140723004441.2e68c0b0@gentoo.org>
In-Reply-To: <20140723004441.2e68c0b0@gentoo.org>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Archives-Salt: 028146a7-3bb3-4252-8ac5-578a3cef4211
X-Archives-Hash: ef70b9a355c2c42b21b9ab402aea39fa

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 22/07/14 06:44 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Jul 2014 09:53:49 -0400 Ian Stakenvicius
> <axs@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
>> Using ${PVR} to detect how portage should update things would be
>> asking for trouble, imo.
> 
> This entire sub thread reads like a dynamic dependencies
> alternative in disguise, the difference lies in an increase of the
> level of control and in the place where this then gets
> reimplemented.


It is.

Here's the situation as I see it -- the portage tree needs to be
consistent at snapshot time.  But things can change all over the
place, deps are moved, virtuals replace single or groups of atoms,
packages get split, etc. etc. etc.

Dynamic deps are the best solution outside of the (rather limited)
profiles/updates functions we have right now to allow us to make
whatever non-files-on-${ROOT} changes we need to make to the vdb.  So
realistically what we should be doing is either trying to work out a
better solution to dynamic deps (something that will failover nicely
for PMs that don't support dynamic deps) or perhaps adding more
functions to support VDB updating via profiles/updates/

Am I off-base here?  Thoughts?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iF4EAREIAAYFAlPSbVgACgkQ2ugaI38ACPBDpAEAnqx8hBGkmmiVGE6Pz7Rh+BE9
ed5KuWwihJdjPGjXdjoA/ifwGD8oUO8epWIq4rahW+egUFhklKtPu57jIYSjY90y
=cZb0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----