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 71D8613877A for ; Sun, 27 Jul 2014 21:39:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D3837E0D9A; Sun, 27 Jul 2014 21:39:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-vc0-f182.google.com (mail-vc0-f182.google.com [209.85.220.182]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E9E36E0D6B for ; Sun, 27 Jul 2014 21:39:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-vc0-f182.google.com with SMTP id hy4so10441816vcb.27 for ; Sun, 27 Jul 2014 14:39:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=Qd0Eyz/29UWdy3LEqgJwxB9ZeriIOR7DTZHG1lkTzHE=; b=s+nlaseYfkrjKcUb4zlcX7kKEvf8FeXoSgKIBF66T8eWRDDm2rtDbZ2udgWTq7WLSr zhFpDu5DmUfgO6wCmlaAcvOhZyOecAsODGzBtO1GVUbnF6Z2t4i7gtPued3cCMoC114L VFnAn14byV86YQgjoOFJng23cy8Ry5vcqPMeqW/BXKGPoEyNkhcDSlavZ46vuWRP25Bx J4t7J3xax7rPBh5aMJL7wNHUHP+Fg5mjByiHejpVJzMVYkJIP/wHqtk0UCWa7GKhYGku XabCetUx1AF4z3NV78eFxkdnrtPeKnWKmbgwhrfpcqFRV7rAWnTfKSN0+zEZRVakaX6d LKYw== 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 10.52.98.201 with SMTP id ek9mr31997055vdb.35.1406497150018; Sun, 27 Jul 2014 14:39:10 -0700 (PDT) Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.52.8.229 with HTTP; Sun, 27 Jul 2014 14:39:09 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20140727223338.25c32791@googlemail.com> References: <53CD6BED.10603@gentoo.org> <53CD8BBA.2010605@gentoo.org> <53D5072E.3030305@gentoo.org> <20140727222429.3febdefa@pomiot.lan> <20140727231701.68a980fc@pomiot.lan> <20140727223338.25c32791@googlemail.com> Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2014 17:39:09 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: s9e9Zj0TMGkHkc2Z_s2fmuJgVJI Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] don't rely on dynamic deps From: Rich Freeman To: gentoo-dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Archives-Salt: f6cfff56-918a-41ef-b9fc-82c1635180db X-Archives-Hash: 95fc0ea00b9cfa218d2a9215b2ddc939 On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 5:33 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Sun, 27 Jul 2014 17:26:27 -0400 > Rich Freeman wrote: >> But, in that case you can put the necessary ebuilds into your overlay >> and then portage can make everything right. > > Oh? Please explain to us a) how the overlay interaction *actually* works > with dynamic dependencies currently, No idea. I doubt it is specified behavior. Certainly we should learn whatever lessons we can from what has been done already, but we aren't constrained by it. > and b) how it can work both in the > case you describe, and in the case where an overlay has a substantially > different ebuild for the same package. I'd think that a change in repository should probably be treated like a revbump. There is no way to know that foo-1-r1 in one overlay is the same as foo-1-r1 in another. The package manager has to figure out which overlay to use already, and if the same PV shows up in a higher-priority overlay then it is treated as a revbump of whatever is in the lower-priority overlay and it triggers a rebuild. Maybe you could get clever about checking for identical ebuilds/eclasses/etc and avoid a rebuild if it literally is the same file, but I wouldn't go further than that. Rich