From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1IHyo4-0006y7-Ii for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 06 Aug 2007 09:23:21 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l769M4p0005069; Mon, 6 Aug 2007 09:22:04 GMT Received: from mail.digimed.co.uk (82-69-83-178.dsl.in-addr.zen.co.uk [82.69.83.178]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l769HqQ4000315 for ; Mon, 6 Aug 2007 09:17:55 GMT Received: from zaphod.digimed.co.uk (zaphod.digimed.co.uk [192.168.1.1]) by mail.digimed.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CD2712A541 for ; Mon, 6 Aug 2007 10:17:51 +0100 (BST) Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 10:17:47 +0100 From: Neil Bothwick To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] portage inconsistency? Message-ID: <20070806101747.7ee10301@zaphod.digimed.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <46B6DFA5.7080406@silvanoc.com> References: <548133.69625.qm@web31706.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <200708051632.36725.bo.andresen@zlin.dk> <46B6DFA5.7080406@silvanoc.com> Organization: Digital Media Production X-Mailer: Claws Mail 2.10.0cvs91 (GTK+ 2.10.14; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) X-GPG-Fingerprint: 7260 0F33 97EC 2F1E 7667 FE37 BA6E 1A97 4375 1903 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_JtLWlbmyRoVu/kDD8Zn1EbQ"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=PGP-SHA1 X-Archives-Salt: 6f9f2762-4605-4bc9-8bdb-724cb443af59 X-Archives-Hash: 816ebdcb6211bff2024b3337e2bb9f01 --Sig_JtLWlbmyRoVu/kDD8Zn1EbQ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, 06 Aug 2007 10:45:25 +0200, Abraham Mar=EDn P=E9rez wrote: > Now think there's a new version available of LIB, let's say version > 2.1, but the latest version of APP is still 1.0. If portage performed a > deep update by default LIB would be rebuilt, but no APP, what would > cause broken dependencies on APP (remember LIB is a dynamic library). > However, is you don't update LIB unless you update also APP you will > prevent this problem*. SLOTs deal with this problem, allowing you to have LIB-1.0 and LIB-2.0 installed simultaneously. > * Needless to say, the problem will still arise if two applications=20 > depend on the same dynamic library, which is a common case, and only > one of them is updated, but still it's an improvement. Unless you use SLOTs. --=20 Neil Bothwick A. Top posters. Q. What is the most annoying thing on Usenet? --Sig_JtLWlbmyRoVu/kDD8Zn1EbQ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFGtuc/um4al0N1GQMRAp2fAJoD2rXqr3isgoWV7NesK3UAc8JEvQCggKLt 5k0oaaWTfrYP4M6HV3jL3hs= =kVZ5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_JtLWlbmyRoVu/kDD8Zn1EbQ-- -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list