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 C1D6813877A for ; Wed, 30 Jul 2014 12:38:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C04A1E0875; Wed, 30 Jul 2014 12:38:51 +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 CEB0EE0858 for ; Wed, 30 Jul 2014 12:38:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.100] (mobile-internet-5d6aaa-114.dhcp.inet.fi [93.106.170.114]) (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 27104340231 for ; Wed, 30 Jul 2014 12:38:48 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <53D8E753.6000902@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 15:38:43 +0300 From: Samuli Suominen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.7.0 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> <53CE6CED.1060300@gentoo.org> <20140723004441.2e68c0b0@gentoo.org> <53D26D58.3000004@gentoo.org> <53D27343.6020009@gentoo.org> <20140726134907.621d8892@googlemail.com> <53D4E5A0.2020403@gentoo.org> <20140730084531.14a288fb@home.puleglot> <53D8847B.2070401@gentoo.org> <53D8A0E6.8000000@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archives-Salt: da55b619-07af-4576-b4c3-31d44c0f0f2b X-Archives-Hash: 7788aaf68ce74c74042994eb44381ffb On 30/07/14 14:18, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 3:38 AM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." > wrote: >> On 7/30/14, 7:36 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote: >>> If it's 2-3 packages out of ~300, I'd rather pick them out than >>> revision bump all ~300 for the 2-3. Or not pick them out at all >>> and let users do the rebuild (which is the obvious answer >>> to the output you posted) >> Peter Stuge pointed it out already, but I also wanted to say rebuilding >> the affected packages is not obvious to me either. > Sure, but this seems more like a portage bug (or at least a portage > output bug) rather than a fundamental issue. > > After all, there was no true block - just a need for a rebuild. > > I heard prerm as a reason why dynamic deps can break (especially with > slot operator deps, though obviously it also breaks for > non-slot-operator deps that should be expressed as such), though as > has been pointed out those will break unless we unmerge and remerge > all reverse-deps on every upgrade. Are there other issues. > > To be honest I was expecting a plethora of issues that can go wrong > with dynamic deps, but so far I'm hearing something like 2-3, and if > that really is all that there is then this may be a solvable issue. > > That's what I've been trying to point out, people are seriously suggesting disabling dynamic deps for race conditions It's like fixing one audio driver in the kernel by deleting whole ALSA block :-( - Samuli