On Tue, 6 Aug 2013 15:31:14 -0400 Alexis Ballier <aball...@gentoo.org> wrote: > Well, ok, but this doesn't relate to what I was writing. Subslot, or > slot emulators or whatever, in their current usage with := > dependencies, are not fine grained enough for some use cases. Those > cause regressions if used improperly.
There is no regression. Previously, packages sometimes broke when doing an upgrade. Now, packages do not break when doing an upgrade. > > You just make the ebuilds install different bits. In effect you > > emulate a simple subset of how parts would do it. > > Which needs patching to be done properly... unless you are suggesting > to build it twice and throw away whats not needed just to workaround > subslots limitations. It's up to the relevant developers to decide how much work they're willing to put in to save some users a bit of CPU time. > > > Or you can do parts/subpackages or subslot dictionaries to express > > > that. > > > > Realistically, parts will never get implemented in Portage. Subslot > > dictionaries might be, if anyone ever figures out what they're > > supposed to be, but they're a heavy price for package developers to > > pay. The question under discussion is whether it's a price worth > > paying to avoid an occasional unnecessary rebuild. Since users do > > far more unnecessary rebuilds for other reasons anyway, and > > reducing CPU usage has never been a goal for Gentoo, I'm not > > convinced it's worth caring about. > > Meanwhile, there's preserve-libs :) Which causes breakage. > Your argumentation is basically 'Other parts are doing it wrong so > it's ok to add some more to it'... We're back a dozen emails back, > aren't we? It's not adding more to it. It's avoiding eliminating a tiny portion of it. Even if you subscribe to the notion that unnecessary rebuilds are a relevant problem, there's no point in caring about the occasional unnecessary rebuild due to overly strict dependencies when most unnecessary rebuilds are caused by something else entirely. > It was meant as an example and has nothing to do with dependency > resolution. The above exercise is something extreme but that we have > to solve; preserve-libs has proven to be correct enough. You have yet > to show a correct, in your sense, solution. The correct solution is heavy slotting. And I'd hardly consider "intermittently introduces invisible security holes and causes unbootable systems" to be "correct enough"... -- Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
