On Tue, 5 Nov 2013 08:29:59 -0600, Bruce Hill wrote:

> I can't understand the *need* for the new slot/subslot philosophy.

The need to it is clear. Previous methods worked by breaking things and
then fixing them, hopefully before the breakage became a problem,
whenever library APIs changed. Subslots are an attempt to deal with this
proactively by fixing the problems as they occur.

Whether subslots are the best way to do it, and whether the
implementation is ideal, as separate questions, but there is no doubt
that any system that relies on the existence of revdep-rebuild is
seriously flawed.

To my mind, the question is not "are subslots needed" but "are they the
best solution to this problem".


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Most software is about as user-friendly as a cornered rat!