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 29F001381F3 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 18:38:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 51F2BE090F; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 18:38:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ve0-f181.google.com (mail-ve0-f181.google.com [209.85.128.181]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3A544E08F0 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 18:38:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ve0-f181.google.com with SMTP id pa12so2662262veb.40 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 11:38:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=h+5ND1+XzEbBxQkTInZ/av4+6ZplKsu+Rk0IJF+OHQ4=; b=SoHuEBGCoy83qVMmCGjcyZ26HxNywM4EJVTv+TxiqH305QIxrlK/RkMpbMB1b7nBkU CPbNJD2um9z5zcilf7h7ctvxc4F+i77KcsP42oTLRQPIGPwmW+oACOOPkx/iPtiBlq+u /syKwwsx2OdUh0qMoM+XGQWP7T8X8HOLwCx37orxbAysbJNeJHUT43gOEahA+YxSqK/Y AWy8zCbYkBEC1t0Qo6AmXBpvh0ivivaeABZIELMbCLHRM5TIAfVCKMFZskrmBy1wgUiR HQmI/XpfRhTz8zxMSB3gtUPTwV8p0dbfqRrEEE4TXzSFsCv5mQ/qu0kv7MCaVjMlrWDj +1Hw== 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 10.220.154.66 with SMTP id n2mr9503689vcw.40.1365791909393; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 11:38:29 -0700 (PDT) Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.52.168.4 with HTTP; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 11:38:29 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20130412162540.GB13054@odin.tremily.us> References: <20121012125315.33500bbb@sera-17.lan> <20121012211023.592e82a1@gentoo.org> <20121013082820.75d280a1@sera-17.lan> <20121016234230.3b79a2fe@gentoo.org> <1350495278.2447.33.camel@belkin4> <20130412162540.GB13054@odin.tremily.us> Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 14:38:29 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: MihbqK3i5e4jskOQgjbWqfvhx9Q Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Binary package dependencies for sub-slot-less EAPIs From: Rich Freeman To: gentoo-dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 4a7c7d1c-9dd9-492d-8a0f-162502fc3605 X-Archives-Hash: 597006653ca4e3228c2baefde40ec42f On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 12:25 PM, W. Trevor King wrote: > In other words, =93Why force folks to do this if there is no benefit?=94. > This is understandable, but I think the broken binary packages [1] are > enough of a visible benefit. I certainly agree. As I bump my own packages I'll certainly be looking for opportunities to use slot operator dependencies and will certainly bump to EAPI5 when I find them, and if somebody were to state that EAPI6 was going to make the lives of binary package users much better I'd be all for pushing to get everything onto EAPI6. My only concern was to let the actual benefits be the driver. Rich