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 C85DF13877A for ; Sat, 26 Jul 2014 22:43:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 50EA8E0F12; Sat, 26 Jul 2014 22:43:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qa0-f52.google.com (mail-qa0-f52.google.com [209.85.216.52]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 62A71E0EF2 for ; Sat, 26 Jul 2014 22:43:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qa0-f52.google.com with SMTP id j15so6019822qaq.39 for ; Sat, 26 Jul 2014 15:43:40 -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=/IHXILa/zj5s+QLnDq8Yrmz3JyWoOdp1U+niWEurvw0=; b=rebgiQhNM0SY30hIQy+DQ+jQe5eIqzmQiGuygKbfytu8Mj7N60jrNjUGG1JcMReeCE /JfW3wKU82qGGjI6koasvDyEQoXYvpbtIFFTbhw+XdpZQc2749ri+ePuYigBo44IaKsT ZogJuivGqD8avgGMkReD+YsIvFd12Aor7dD1exzHlTWwgObxL7TTtX8VbqRzZNp2RkAk YxUlLqGdQTFGqjVKZpeuFYQeXjbVON9WUGTAp6LPX6HwYf9UPjXLh0WqQp3ri2bnDr55 pMhzuy8yw/uMbAXubX7n7x1M/ADKhGaTAk+calOqJjkYFv0H9Q1G09Y4ndPK/VbAVlIV 7DiQ== 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 X-Received: by 10.224.163.144 with SMTP id a16mr41028349qay.61.1406414620479; Sat, 26 Jul 2014 15:43:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.140.44.34 with HTTP; Sat, 26 Jul 2014 15:43:40 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <53CD6BED.10603@gentoo.org> <53CD8BBA.2010605@gentoo.org> <53CE11F9.8020700@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2014 10:43:40 +1200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: don't rely on dynamic deps From: Kent Fredric To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01536b68dc882004ff206b6a X-Archives-Salt: 1071aa7d-14bf-4006-b7f4-dddf24a10dc7 X-Archives-Hash: fba2d015831268270b87a13fe49abc4e --089e01536b68dc882004ff206b6a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On 27 July 2014 02:12, Martin Vaeth wrote: > > Do not forget modification of eclasses which then require mass bumps! I'm curious what the -r1.1 technique would do here. I mean, wouldn't that mean you have 2 ebuilds that are identical except for the '.1' simply due to the eclass change? That's going to be confusing. -r1.1 weirdness feels like it may cause more problems than it solves. -- Kent *KENTNL* - https://metacpan.org/author/KENTNL --089e01536b68dc882004ff206b6a Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

= On 27 July 2014 02:12, Martin Vaeth <martin@mvath.de> wrote:

Do not forget modification of eclasses which then require mass bumps!

I'm curious what the = -r1.1 technique would do here.

I mean, wouldn't that mean you ha= ve 2 ebuilds that are identical except for the '.1' simply due to t= he eclass change?

That's going to be confusing.


-r1.1 weirdness feels like it may c= ause more problems than it solves.

--
--089e01536b68dc882004ff206b6a--