[gentoo-dev] Portage as a dependency

[gentoo-dev] Portage as a dependency

[Sean P. Kane]

I reported a bug earlier today that turned out to be caused by a
slightly older version of Portage. Shouldn't we consider having portage
or the ebuilds handle this type of situation better, by either having
the ebuilds have a particular version of portage as a dependency or
making portage always check for a newer stable version of portage
whenever it does an emerge and then upgrading to that first. As this
might be "bad" behaviour for some people under certain circumstances, it
could always be enabled or disabled via a switch like --upportage or
some such. 

Does anyone see a good solution here? If you should always be using the
newest portage then shouldn't portage check that its' self?

Thanks,
Sean

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage as a dependency

[Dylan Carlson]

On Thursday 06 February 2003 06:17 pm, Sean P. Kane wrote:
> I reported a bug earlier today that turned out to be caused by a
> slightly older version of Portage. Shouldn't we consider having portage
> or the ebuilds handle this type of situation better, by either having
> the ebuilds have a particular version of portage as a dependency or
> making portage always check for a newer stable version of portage
> whenever it does an emerge and then upgrading to that first. 

RDEPEND=">=sys-apps/portage-2.0.47", as an example, is one way an ebuild 
can do it.    

Furthermore, Portage should be backward compatible with ebuilds written for 
earlier versions.  DEPEND/RDEPEND should be all that is necessary in 
situations where an ebuild depends on a newer, masked version of Portage  
-- if that is in fact necessary.

Cheers,
Dylan Carlson

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

RE: [gentoo-dev] Portage as a dependency

[Sean P. Kane]

An example of a package is x11-base/xfree-4.2.1-r2 which requries a
version of Portage that doesn't experience BUG 13013
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13013. If people know this it
would be very helpful to either makrk it as a dependency, which may
actually be too difficult for package mantainers to keep updated, or
allow Portage to have an auto-update feature that will always update
Portage before doing other emerges.

Sean


-----Original Message-----
From: Dylan Carlson [mailto:absinthe@pobox.com] 
Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 19:30
To: Sean P. Kane; gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage as a dependency


On Thursday 06 February 2003 06:17 pm, Sean P. Kane wrote:
> I reported a bug earlier today that turned out to be caused by a 
> slightly older version of Portage. Shouldn't we consider having 
> portage or the ebuilds handle this type of situation better, by either

> having the ebuilds have a particular version of portage as a 
> dependency or making portage always check for a newer stable version 
> of portage whenever it does an emerge and then upgrading to that 
> first.

RDEPEND=">=sys-apps/portage-2.0.47", as an example, is one way an ebuild

can do it.    

Furthermore, Portage should be backward compatible with ebuilds written
for 
earlier versions.  DEPEND/RDEPEND should be all that is necessary in 
situations where an ebuild depends on a newer, masked version of Portage

-- if that is in fact necessary.

Cheers,
Dylan Carlson

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

RE: [gentoo-dev] Portage as a dependency

[Sean P. Kane]

I created a bug/enhancement listing for this at
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15278

Sean


-----Original Message-----
From: Sean P. Kane 
Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 08:50
To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Subject: RE: [gentoo-dev] Portage as a dependency


An example of a package is x11-base/xfree-4.2.1-r2 which requries a
version of Portage that doesn't experience BUG 13013
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13013. If people know this it
would be very helpful to either makrk it as a dependency, which may
actually be too difficult for package mantainers to keep updated, or
allow Portage to have an auto-update feature that will always update
Portage before doing other emerges.

Sean


-----Original Message-----
From: Dylan Carlson [mailto:absinthe@pobox.com] 
Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 19:30
To: Sean P. Kane; gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage as a dependency


On Thursday 06 February 2003 06:17 pm, Sean P. Kane wrote:
> I reported a bug earlier today that turned out to be caused by a
> slightly older version of Portage. Shouldn't we consider having 
> portage or the ebuilds handle this type of situation better, by either

> having the ebuilds have a particular version of portage as a
> dependency or making portage always check for a newer stable version 
> of portage whenever it does an emerge and then upgrading to that 
> first.

RDEPEND=">=sys-apps/portage-2.0.47", as an example, is one way an ebuild

can do it.    

Furthermore, Portage should be backward compatible with ebuilds written
for 
earlier versions.  DEPEND/RDEPEND should be all that is necessary in 
situations where an ebuild depends on a newer, masked version of Portage

-- if that is in fact necessary.

Cheers,
Dylan Carlson

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage as a dependency

[Alain Penders]

I would hope that people rsync before installing new packages -- saves having 
to install them twice.  After the rsync, if you run emerge -up world, you'll
get a specific message in the package list about a new portage being 
available.  Isn't this and the general knowledge that Gentoo hinges on portage
enough for people to update portage before emerging other packages?

Alain


On Fri, Feb 07, 2003 at 08:49:38AM -0800, Sean P. Kane wrote:
> An example of a package is x11-base/xfree-4.2.1-r2 which requries a
> version of Portage that doesn't experience BUG 13013
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13013. If people know this it
> would be very helpful to either makrk it as a dependency, which may
> actually be too difficult for package mantainers to keep updated, or
> allow Portage to have an auto-update feature that will always update
> Portage before doing other emerges.
> 
> Sean
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dylan Carlson [mailto:absinthe@pobox.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 19:30
> To: Sean P. Kane; gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage as a dependency
> 
> 
> On Thursday 06 February 2003 06:17 pm, Sean P. Kane wrote:
> > I reported a bug earlier today that turned out to be caused by a 
> > slightly older version of Portage. Shouldn't we consider having 
> > portage or the ebuilds handle this type of situation better, by either
> 
> > having the ebuilds have a particular version of portage as a 
> > dependency or making portage always check for a newer stable version 
> > of portage whenever it does an emerge and then upgrading to that 
> > first.
> 
> RDEPEND=">=sys-apps/portage-2.0.47", as an example, is one way an ebuild
> 
> can do it.    
> 
> Furthermore, Portage should be backward compatible with ebuilds written
> for 
> earlier versions.  DEPEND/RDEPEND should be all that is necessary in 
> situations where an ebuild depends on a newer, masked version of Portage
> 
> -- if that is in fact necessary.
> 
> Cheers,
> Dylan Carlson
> 
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
> 
> 
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
> 

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage as a dependency

[Toby Dickenson]

On Friday 07 February 2003 5:06 pm, Alain Penders wrote:

> Isn't this and the general knowledge that Gentoo
> hinges on portage enough for people to update portage before emerging other
> packages?

If that is true (and Im not sure it is) then portage should upgrade itsef 
automatically.



--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage as a dependency

[Eugene Wong]

>From: Alain Penders <alain@gentoo.org>
>To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
>Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage as a dependency
>Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2003 10:06:47 -0700
>
>I would hope that people rsync before installing new packages -- saves 
>having
>to install them twice.  After the rsync, if you run emerge -up world, 
>you'll
>get a specific message in the package list about a new portage being
>available.  Isn't this and the general knowledge that Gentoo hinges on 
>portage
>enough for people to update portage before emerging other packages?

Well, it wasn't entirely obvious to me. However, that's probably because I'm 
too new @ the concept of portage. If you guys are going after a certain type 
of technical user, then it's no big deal, but if you are going after user 
friendliness, then there should be more done to prevent problems.


Sincerely, and with thanks,
Eugene T.S. Wong

_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

RE: [gentoo-dev] Portage as a dependency

[Sean P. Kane]

This is a very new feature of portage, it didn't do this until very
recently and it isn't really helpful if you are only emerging one
pacakge and it is DEPENDANT on a particular version of Portage, yet
doesn't require that version in it's ebuild.

Sean


-----Original Message-----
From: Alain Penders [mailto:alain@gentoo.org] 
Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 09:07
To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage as a dependency


I would hope that people rsync before installing new packages -- saves
having 
to install them twice.  After the rsync, if you run emerge -up world,
you'll get a specific message in the package list about a new portage
being 
available.  Isn't this and the general knowledge that Gentoo hinges on
portage enough for people to update portage before emerging other
packages?

Alain


On Fri, Feb 07, 2003 at 08:49:38AM -0800, Sean P. Kane wrote:
> An example of a package is x11-base/xfree-4.2.1-r2 which requries a
> version of Portage that doesn't experience BUG 13013 
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13013. If people know this it 
> would be very helpful to either makrk it as a dependency, which may 
> actually be too difficult for package mantainers to keep updated, or 
> allow Portage to have an auto-update feature that will always update 
> Portage before doing other emerges.
> 
> Sean
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dylan Carlson [mailto:absinthe@pobox.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 19:30
> To: Sean P. Kane; gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage as a dependency
> 
> 
> On Thursday 06 February 2003 06:17 pm, Sean P. Kane wrote:
> > I reported a bug earlier today that turned out to be caused by a 
> > slightly older version of Portage. Shouldn't we consider having 
> > portage or the ebuilds handle this type of situation better, by 
> > either
> 
> > having the ebuilds have a particular version of portage as a 
> > dependency or making portage always check for a newer stable version

> > of portage whenever it does an emerge and then upgrading to that 
> > first.
> 
> RDEPEND=">=sys-apps/portage-2.0.47", as an example, is one way an
> ebuild
> 
> can do it.    
> 
> Furthermore, Portage should be backward compatible with ebuilds
> written for earlier versions.  DEPEND/RDEPEND should be all that is 
> necessary in situations where an ebuild depends on a newer, masked 
> version of Portage
> 
> -- if that is in fact necessary.
> 
> Cheers,
> Dylan Carlson
> 
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
> 
> 
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
> 

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list