El sáb, 16-06-2012 a las 17:46 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh escribió: > On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 18:41:51 +0200 > Pacho Ramos <pa...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > The :*/:= feature was designed to solve one specific problem: if a > > > user has foo installed, and foo deps upon bar, and bar:1 is > > > installed, and the user wants to install bar:2 and then uninstall > > > bar:1, will foo break? :* means no, := means yes. > > > > And, wouldn't it be covered simply making that package not depend on > > any slot specifically? > > Some people use "no slot" to mean "and it's fixed at build time", and > some use it to mean "and I don't care". We *could* just omit :*, and > use := for locking, but an explicit :* means someone has checked their > work (and can be verified by repoman) whereas no slot probably means > laziness. > > > > I'm pretty sure the route Exherbo is going to take with this is very > > > different, and will involve souped-up USE flags that allow "parts" > > > of a package (such as its libraries) to be kept around, possibly > > > together with a special form of blocker that acts only upon > > > installed packages, with a strict post ordering. It's not going to > > > involve sub-slots, in any case. > > > > Well, probably the problem is to predict when will that be really > > solved there :( > > Naah. This is one of those things that requires developers to put quite > a lot of exta effort in to their packages in order to improve the > quality of experience for users, which means it's not going to be > suitable for Gentoo's development model. >
Well, not all people have infinite time to put that huge effort you sometimes would demand us to make things work perfectly :| (and looks like Exherbo developer also have the same problem as this model is still not implemented there, no? And that is normal, they also have time constraints for sure)
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
