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 9BBDF139BC6 for ; Sun, 27 Sep 2015 22:33:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EE41821C00E; Sun, 27 Sep 2015 22:33:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wi0-f170.google.com (mail-wi0-f170.google.com [209.85.212.170]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC23DE0852 for ; Sun, 27 Sep 2015 22:33:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wiclk2 with SMTP id lk2so78633458wic.1 for ; Sun, 27 Sep 2015 15:33:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=oytyZpEW77QqxGkNzXY5UKBzvSlezbuErSNtFn8g9R0=; b=EwTuHDtaIAphES4I8J8i/3mDsdalSu81+hLomNkywvuMPcVRkKUe0GK/agKpIIihBW cAD/KSp0Li8dXTMjgMySFyo6XyRCM5O1h49yEUa/NbALGhZzqLZk+EF8VAVNGfIhNvYq bnN94v8H2slms8iLOxUt6qLUsoNQO8ZYH7X3fEt8puUDIU5xd0S5loRPmP1U3DIL9b6H asdqYEjSw4ChqFFIPacCLP0xySXzpgf+WYzGWT/IP0inC3N5Ub+cgRHIMkpfK1PT7DRd vVSsaBb2iPDaq2979EKtNTmYkqL5wiMjlZ8q248nlhKrgQlszzBs0+2aQ9VLRmgPHV85 9r7g== X-Received: by 10.194.158.68 with SMTP id ws4mr20179491wjb.25.1443393190751; Sun, 27 Sep 2015 15:33:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.20.0.41] (105-237-149-222.access.mtnbusiness.co.za. [105.237.149.222]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id qq4sm15094265wjc.14.2015.09.27.15.33.09 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 27 Sep 2015 15:33:09 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] dynamic deps, wtf are they exactly To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org References: <56080616.5090406@gmail.com> <560826D7.7070307@gentoo.org> <560844D0.90302@gmail.com> <56086BED.3070806@gentoo.org> From: Alan McKinnon Message-ID: <56086E89.7060601@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 00:32:41 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <56086BED.3070806@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: b582e343-23ac-4f50-8b55-acd083d52e15 X-Archives-Hash: ae2d552475f2afc814bbc3b04039dc84 On 28/09/2015 00:21, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 09/27/2015 03:34 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote: >> >> Now it all makes sense, as a bonus I now see why why so many senior devs >> are so pedantic about revbumps (they have reason). >> >> Now that I know what the symptom will be, are bug reports useful? >> > > I don't think most developers are aware of the problem, so if you point > out that the lack of a revbump causes pain, many will be glad to know > and adjust their behavior. > > Or, you might just get yelled at. It's one of /those/ issues. Oh, we're well used to deal with touchy issues around here. And we do our fair share of yelling too :-) Thanks for the feedback. Appreciated. -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckinnon@gmail.com