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 887D613877A for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 21:38:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0FBF2E0AEB; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 21:38:42 +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 3C763E0AC1 for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 21:38:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EFF03401E6 for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 21:38:40 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at gentoo.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.727 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.727 tagged_above=-999 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.643, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable 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 NOoB1CNnKRZ7 for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 21:38:33 +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 AC7413401C3 for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 21:38:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XDKX1-0003tH-Jw for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Fri, 01 Aug 2014 23:38:31 +0200 Received: from lounge.imp.fu-berlin.de ([160.45.42.83]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 01 Aug 2014 23:38:31 +0200 Received: from martin by lounge.imp.fu-berlin.de with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 01 Aug 2014 23:38:31 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Martin Vaeth Subject: [gentoo-dev] PMS (was: don't rely on dynamic deps) Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2014 21:38:18 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <53CD6BED.10603@gentoo.org> <201407212153.04605.dilfridge@gentoo.org> <20140721205527.142cb3d5@googlemail.com> <1405976767.1013.9.camel@gentoo.org> <53CE6CED.1060300@gentoo.org> <20140723004441.2e68c0b0@gentoo.org> <53D26D58.3000004@gentoo.org> <53D27343.6020009@gentoo.org> <21459.42341.861787.530003@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: lounge.imp.fu-berlin.de User-Agent: slrn/pre1.0.0-26 (Linux) 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 X-Archives-Salt: 25839d06-b691-4bd5-8789-e9b71b7b5a22 X-Archives-Hash: a185c5b84466dc49211b04a5a407240c Ulrich Mueller wrote: >>>>>> On Sat, 26 Jul 2014, Martin Vaeth wrote: > >> Quite the opposite, PMS claims that one cannot rely on >> anything stored in /var/db > > Where does it say so? "Appendix B: Unspecified Items The following items are not specified by this document, and must not be relied upon by ebuilds. [...] The VDB (/var/db/pkg) [...]" This is bugging me for quite a while already, because I had to try and to rely on undocumented behaviour for all features of eix which access /var/db/pkg. It also is one of the reasons why it might be dangerous if you use another PM even only for testing purposes: In theory, it might even be possible that a package installed by one PM is not recognized by the other. I guess that this is not a big problem in practice, but in fine points like the discussed prerm perhaps some problems might arise through mixing.