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 8A32C1381F4 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 19:51:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4490AE0AD8; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 19:51:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-bk0-f53.google.com (mail-bk0-f53.google.com [209.85.214.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B020BE077F for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 19:50:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: by bkwj4 with SMTP id j4so857735bkw.40 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 12:50:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=uaepGTAeqbwj/dIBq9sQnbzbk09oSQlHFViKd0O9naY=; b=y5aHTpRjY/8U5plzJ0RCX9xHs+AugHk9Lz5lAG2bSBYSqeEE2KNXNJSjXRXdOD4QE3 6uMJqd0MLGVyG8SdZdybcl+HNVpTzzGVwFygFudVhlLJsvn3oESGtwEUrzEpLBNqiKfR hhgjMw6bcsY0GsGudI41SVd+4Ag13eL4rVgACfrlx+xu5iNJxtJACQXLDwaRCxOL0uw4 NsnoXggwvbrbVngj0Ry6Cq0R6kk812422FtVh8cQxWN1SMlqmUDce7AUIos2HeXQNtu+ OAY/Bf+91ZLVaw9xNhIxDSYkxrNUumLECJ+5CZOA9Abgzio2IX8IPKgabMupNHEUiyGl 2dmA== 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 Received: by 10.204.136.205 with SMTP id s13mr8298334bkt.22.1345060228255; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 12:50:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.205.25.8 with HTTP; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 12:50:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20120815202618.611fbcca@googlemail.com> References: <1344366029.24762.31.camel@TesterTop4> <502377E7.8010803@gentoo.org> <1344535966.2121.6.camel@TesterTop4> <20120809183130.GA6795@linux1> <20120809195727.5d04ccff@googlemail.com> <20120814032416.GA8489@kroah.com> <20120815202618.611fbcca@googlemail.com> Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 15:50:28 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Questions about SystemD and OpenRC From: Michael Mol To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Archives-Salt: 78f4a8f8-702d-4a68-9145-4df88407cd2e X-Archives-Hash: ed18a7167d394bf48cd93f8dd1b509ff On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 3:26 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Wed, 15 Aug 2012 15:18:24 -0400 > Michael Mol wrote: >> I've occasionally noticed portage tell me about circular dependencies, >> where the most straight forward resolution is to emerge some package >> in the loop twice. The first time, with a USE flag disabled (avahi and >> gtk are the usual suspects), and the second time with the USE flag >> enabled. >> >> In circumstances where it's necessary to do something like that to >> reach a final desired system state, I'm not sure I see any problem >> with portage automatically doing the two-stage emerge. > > That's going to be rather horrible when your package mangler > "temporarily" turns off acl or turns on build... Fair observation; there would need to be a way either weight benign or dangerous USE/package flags, and search paths with weights outside of a 'safe' range would be discarded. A mechanism like that also offers a means of finding and favoring cheap rebuilds over expensive ones; rebuilding gcc an extra time ought to be disfavored over rebuilding, say, sudo. -- :wq