From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-dev+bounces-66743-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5907C1387FD
for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 08:21:32 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A144EE0B89;
Tue, 22 Jul 2014 08:21:26 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183])
(using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 94A70E0B59
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 08:21:25 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8A25340092
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 08:21:24 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at gentoo.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.604
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.604 tagged_above=-999 required=5.5
tests=[AWL=-0.601, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001,
SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([IPv6:::ffff:127.0.0.1])
by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [IPv6:::ffff:127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id mFvnmb_GwKDC for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>;
Tue, 22 Jul 2014 08:21:19 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3])
(using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8049E33FD61
for <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 08:21:19 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69)
(envelope-from <lnx-gentoo-dev@m.gmane.org>)
id 1X9VK1-0003NK-Hi
for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 10:21:17 +0200
Received: from ppp118-209-75-88.lns20.mel4.internode.on.net ([118.209.75.88])
by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
for <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 10:21:17 +0200
Received: from kensington by ppp118-209-75-88.lns20.mel4.internode.on.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
for <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 10:21:17 +0200
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
From: Michael Palimaka <kensington@gentoo.org>
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: don't rely on dynamic deps
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 18:21:00 +1000
Message-ID: <lql6tb$e3n$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <53CD6BED.10603@gentoo.org> <53CD8BBA.2010605@gentoo.org>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp118-209-75-88.lns20.mel4.internode.on.net
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
In-Reply-To: <53CD8BBA.2010605@gentoo.org>
X-Archives-Salt: 9e4a8548-098f-4cb2-b9a9-d117a6bcabd1
X-Archives-Hash: 14b4c1c7522b1d8357074246fbdf8770
On 07/22/2014 07:52 AM, Alexander Berntsen wrote:
>
> To sum up: My vote is disable dynamic-deps. And I would be happy to
> apply a patch that does this with the information I have today.
What a great way to kill the distro.
I can already heat my house with the number of unnecessary rebuilds - I
can't imagine how many people will be left once we have to needlessly
rebuild libreoffice and half the tree every time someone makes some
minor change. If developers can't revbump correctly to address the
shortcomings of dynamic deps, why do we expect they will be able to do
so for static deps?
When can we expect this issue to be brought before the Council? I look
forward to seeing the specific examples of unavoidable breakage that
would be required to make such a decision.