* Re: [gentoo-dev] Dependencies default to accept any slot value acceptable (:*), can we default to :0 instead?
@ 2013-12-08 18:56 99% ` Rich Freeman
0 siblings, 0 replies; 1+ results
From: Rich Freeman @ 2013-12-08 18:56 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 12:46 PM, Tom Wijsman <TomWij@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> Given that the retroactive change I suggest causes a lot of complexity;
> changing it on the next EAPI indeed sounds like one way to go, the
> alternative is to make it a suggestive guideline or policy and cover
> it as a QA check in repoman.
>
> That QA check could throw a warning when a dependency has no slot.
I think we're better off with defaulting to slot 0 rather than
erroring/warning if no slot is specified. Otherwise we're basically
going to have to modify every ebuild in the tree to add the :0 (unless
there is no warning when only slot 0 exists, but then another slot
could be added at any time and what is the behavior then?).
Or we could do both - we could define EAPI 6 as having :0 be the
default slot behavior, and we could have repoman offer soft warnings
on earlier EAPIs if there is no explicit slot.
(I'd even suggest making the default :0= except that there is no way
to override that as we defined not depending on a subslot as the
absence of any operator and not a different operator that is simply
defaulted.)
Rich
^ permalink raw reply [relevance 99%]
Results 1-1 of 1 | reverse | options above
-- pct% links below jump to the message on this page, permalinks otherwise --
2013-12-08 16:56 [gentoo-dev] Dependencies default to accept any slot value acceptable (:*), can we default to :0 instead? Tom Wijsman
2013-12-08 17:19 ` Andreas K. Huettel
2013-12-08 17:26 ` Pacho Ramos
2013-12-08 17:46 ` Tom Wijsman
2013-12-08 18:56 99% ` Rich Freeman
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox