2010-03-08 22:28:16 William Hubbs napisał(a): > On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 04:19:36PM -0800, Zac Medico wrote: > > No, it won't. To prove it, I've just tested with a stable stage3 > > containing portage-2.1.7.x. Here are the steps: > > > > 1) extract stable stage3 and chroot into it > > 2) mkdir /etc/portage && echo "dev-lang/python ~*" >> > > /etc/portage/package.keywords > > 3) Run `emerge -pu --deep=1 portage`: > > These are the packages that would be merged, in order: > > > > Calculating dependencies... done! > > [ebuild UD] sys-apps/sandbox-1.6-r2 [2.2] > > [ebuild UD] app-shells/bash-4.0_p35 [4.0_p37] > > [ebuild U ] dev-lang/python-2.6.4-r1 [2.6.4] > > > > If you try `emerge -puD world` then you will see > > dev-lang/python-3.1.1-r1 pulled in by the unspecific dev-lang/python > > atoms in the cracklib and libxml2 dependencies. However, in > > portage-2.1.7.x (current stable), there is support for > > pseudo-version-ranges in dependencies. This allows you use a > > dependency like <dev-lang/python-3 in a package that doesn't support > > python3, and that will prevent it from getting pulled into the > > According to this, we can fix all of the dependencies in the tree then > stabilize python3 without having any issues, so I would vote for this > route, because it still oinsures that the stable tree will work > together.
Almost everybody has at least 1 package installed which supports both Python 2 and Python 3 and depends on dev-lang/python without version specification, so Python 3 would be pulled into dependency graph, so fixing of dependencies doesn't need to block stabilization of Python 3. -- Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
