From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1K22vx-0006UP-MC for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 30 May 2008 11:38:10 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EB218E02D2; Fri, 30 May 2008 11:38:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F381E02D2 for ; Fri, 30 May 2008 11:38:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38FD867419 for ; Fri, 30 May 2008 11:38:07 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -3.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 required=5.5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Gy73gVNgWqwh for ; Fri, 30 May 2008 11:38:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A8FA67451 for ; Fri, 30 May 2008 11:38:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1K22vf-0003jE-SB for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Fri, 30 May 2008 11:37:51 +0000 Received: from ppp-169-232.21-151.libero.it ([151.21.232.169]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 30 May 2008 11:37:51 +0000 Received: from flameeyes by ppp-169-232.21-151.libero.it with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 30 May 2008 11:37:51 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: flameeyes@gmail.com (Diego 'Flameeyes' =?utf-8?Q?Petten=C3=B2?=) Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: Should preserve-libs be enabled by default? Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 13:37:42 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20080529011316.54f0f1f6@sheridan.genone.homeip.net> <20080530070243.dc40e0f7.genone@gentoo.org> 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 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-169-232.21-151.libero.it User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:+DEx/mJ70ENrE8RuKIk3t6s4UjE= Sender: news X-Archives-Salt: a7e5731e-9936-4bd3-87c9-e51a1d1a72a6 X-Archives-Hash: f9175c1254b384a1f8d20f55d30a39f1 --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Marius Mauch writes: > That's what `emerge @preserved-rebuild` does, or do you mean something > different? I meant something different, see the rst. > Well, with preserve-libs the situation is this (using your example): > - user upgrades expat, portage keeps libexpat.so.0 around > (some packages might now be linked against both versions if the session > included other packages as well) > - emerge tells the user to rebuild all affected packages (affected =3D > contains libexpat.so.0 in NEEDED, so includes both libfoo and bar) by > using `emerge @preserved-rebuild` (in the future this could also be done > automatically, but that won't be before 2.2 final) > - when all affected packages have been rebuilt (so their NEEDED entries > don't contain libexpat.so.0 anymore) libexpat.so.0 is automatically > removed Okay this works if the user follows the procedure and tries not to bend the rules... > So, if I understand you correctly (probably not), you want portage to > prevent the user from building any packages depending on any affected > package before the last step is completed? Yes this is exactly what I meant. Whenever a dependency is in the @preserved-rebuild set, it should not be linked against. It could still be used, but as now we don't have an easy way to distinguish between the two, I'd say it's better to check both DEPEND and RDEPEND and disallow its usage as a dependency until it's removed from the set. > Whoever that is is welcome to voice his opinion here, that's the point > of this thread after all. (It was mostly a disclaimer so that users don't feel like they get ignored without just cause if they want behaviour X and instead we go with behaviour Y... I'm sure a lot of people wouldn't like the option I proposed above, but trust me there's a reason why I voiced that concern :) ). =2D-=20 Diego "Flameeyes" Petten=C3=B2 http://blog.flameeyes.eu/ --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkg/5wYACgkQe2h1+2mHVWOpvwCg63sUPBOtcl+e9LrNkdFOWp1q +mYAniW+7eik4ysMtKliDwxy5UUE/lam =JsqL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=-- -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list