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 4D2A3139BC6 for ; Thu, 17 Sep 2015 19:15:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6189BE08D1; Thu, 17 Sep 2015 19:15:06 +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 6493CE0882 for ; Thu, 17 Sep 2015 19:15:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.0.246.105] (unknown [2.223.210.3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: hwoarang) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 21D2A3406CE for ; Thu, 17 Sep 2015 19:15:03 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Dynamic dependencies To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <5918463.Zo9u92WpxF@kailua> From: Markos Chandras Message-ID: <55FB1133.9080707@gentoo.org> Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 20:14:59 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 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 In-Reply-To: <5918463.Zo9u92WpxF@kailua> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 98a99c19-c508-4c62-a02e-3a3611f89946 X-Archives-Hash: 660512554a25227dcce71878a9704ce2 On 09/16/2015 04:49 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > Hi all, > > here's a quote from the Council 20140826 summary: > >> Dynamic dependencies in Portage >> =============================== >> During discussion, is was remarked that some changes, e.g. to >> dependencies in eclasses, could require mass rebuilds of packages. >> >> Vote: >> - "The council asks the Portage team to first outline their long-term >> plan regarding removal or replacement of dynamic dependencies, >> before they remove this feature. In particular, tree policies and >> the handling of eclasses and virtuals need to be clarified." >> Accepted unanimously. > > Since there seems to be interest in the Portage team to go ahead with that > plan, I'd like to ask about the tree policies and the handling of eclasses and > virtuals. > > I guess we'd appreciate this as a prerequisite for being able to give the plan > future council support. > > Cheers, > Andreas > could someone explain what the dynamic dependencies are in the context of portage and ebuilds? because that does seem to be something portage-internal specific in the way it handles changes in {,R}DEPEND without revbumps. Where is this thing documented in the first place? -- Regards, Markos Chandras