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 5C5C6138010 for ; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 19:20:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C9215E0630; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 19:19:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-we0-f181.google.com (mail-we0-f181.google.com [74.125.82.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91C82E062D for ; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 19:18:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: by weyt57 with SMTP id t57so2000514wey.40 for ; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 12:18:54 -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 :cc:content-type; bh=YZeDHLkHI0rH6mEABUViVjGbN9LND0k15enR1+Dftrw=; b=IXnXx48jStOaNpgvPNBJHq6ZAi371+bqo05rxmpwWkAFeZ56xu/BxqA15xVQ7oTl/P qm2NXxcHK0BPbzrSlj/46Z3eW5XudBRd8kwM3VJABViapR3d8PPewjZMKhs2cTYqHuHg rEBGVw/Iwd1+dI23tPANDSPNp9eA2/C9l5XG0LqyqU/6C8UYprbH3uUtPGzKp3mkBA2C T1OQt+S4HphlPqngaYihXOLTqM4kUt3pvPa1gquTeOdW4fp1FD7e4AclVjKAXrDz1mJR pIiwqJTNpk4L8vl8Lu3NfiLWwLXwJ+R2jTbFuJX9avUjvtc0U/SEtW4MjksLsOwO86dx RTJg== 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 10.180.106.137 with SMTP id gu9mr490204wib.20.1347563934834; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 12:18:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.194.78.225 with HTTP; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 12:18:54 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20120911021617.GE8036@localhost> References: <20120907124559.68a1b88d@googlemail.com> <20120907124641.0135693d@gentoo.org> <20120907180351.4e682fd5@pomiocik.lan> <20120907144025.06b3d1eb@gentoo.org> <20120907202103.671d98b1@pomiocik.lan> <20120907165948.2dbe3fdd@gentoo.org> <20120907221051.4a7a6bde@pomiocik.lan> <504A5599.7060506@gentoo.org> <20120911021617.GE8036@localhost> Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 07:18:54 +1200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Unified DEPENDENCIES concept From: Kent Fredric To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Cc: axs@gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Archives-Salt: 8779ad78-a5b1-4183-92c9-3ecd4ded8973 X-Archives-Hash: 91c172605e87c28299b9a15df9798fb3 On 11 September 2012 14:16, Brian Harring wrote: > On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 04:14:17PM -0400, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: >> Is there anything in particular in the spec/proposal for DEPENDENCIES >> that would exclude the addition of individual "build: app-cat/myatom" >> "run: app-cat/myatom" deps by an eclass or eclasses? I know the >> "goal" here is to make things atom-centric, but I can't see an >> implementation ever working of this that wouldn't permit the "pile-on" >> of additional entries of different (or even the same) roles on >> identical or near-identical atoms. > > They could be piled on; it would require each eclass to reset the > label for safety reasons though; same goes for ebuilds frankly (or the > PM would have to reset the context to build+run: each time through). > > Pardon if addressed elsewhere; this thread is a fucking mess... > ~harring > Correct me if I'm wrong, but couldn't the entire proposition could be implemented in an eclass, not needing the EAPI development cycle to be tied up with it. All you need is something in bash that can parse DEPENDENCIES and populate *DEPEND , and the underlying guts could be done in practically any language without requiring PM specific implementations. [[[ inherit polydep; DEPENDENCIES=" Stuff Here. "; ]]] The only thing I know of that is limiting the above from being implemented that way is the lack of post-source eclass hooks, that is: currently you'd have to do either [[[ DEPENDENCIES="..." inherit polydep; ]]] or use a callback [[[ inherit polydep; DEPENDENCIES=" ... " polydeps; ]]] -- Kent perl -e "print substr( \"edrgmaM SPA NOcomil.ic\\@tfrken\", \$_ * 3, 3 ) for ( 9,8,0,7,1,6,5,4,3,2 );" http://kent-fredric.fox.geek.nz