On 03/18/2010 10:21 PM, Thomas Sachau wrote: > On 03/18/2010 09:02 PM, Petteri Räty wrote: >> On 03/18/2010 09:43 PM, Thomas Sachau wrote: >>> >>> So my vote goes for changing the dependency strings for affected packages. >>> >> >> Here's some thoughts on the matter: >> >> - dev-lang/python is correct if the package works with all python >> versions in tree >> >> - in general we want new slots of packages like gcc being pulled in >> >> Here's how we could change Portage behavior for pulling new slots that >> are not strictly required: >> >> - for packages in the world file install as soon as available >> >> - for dependencies install the new slot if everything works with the new >> slot >> >> This would mean that Portage would stay with 2.6 as long as you have >> something that doesn't work with 3.x installed. >> >> Regards, >> Petteri >> > > How do you detect this?
By looking at the dependency graph? > Also, what about a new slot for python-2? E.g. 2.7? Handled by the same rules. > And do you want to add a special rule to portage just for the special case of > python instead of the > ebuilds/eclasses having the issue? > What issue is there with ebuilds/eclasses? Both should reflect the deps as well as can be done with current EAPIs. If they don't, they need to be fixed. Regards, Petteri
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
