On Sun, 27 Jul 2014 11:09:05 -0400 Rich Freeman <ri...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 10:59 AM, Ciaran McCreesh > <ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > On Sun, 27 Jul 2014 16:56:17 +0200 > > ""Paweł Hajdan, Jr."" <phajdan...@gentoo.org> wrote: > >> It seems really tricky to correctly reason about dependency > >> resolution. > > > > It's actually very easy if you do away with all the things that are > > making it unnecessarily complicated... Nearly all of the complexity > > is self-inflicted. > > What would you do away with? Being able to virtualize packages > without recompiling everything that depends on them?
Well that's never worked properly or consistently to begin with, so all we'd be doing away with is the pretence that we can get away with it. > I do appreciate your argument, but at the same time for every complex > problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. Unfortunately that's the answer Gentoo usually goes with. > There are a lot of things in Gentoo that could be done in a simpler > fashion, and 10 years ago Gentoo was a lot simpler than it is today. > The thing is, all that complexity was added for a reason. Most of that complexity was added due to "not thinking things through fully" and "adding in a short-term hack with long-term consequences". The reason was rarely "we need this complexity", and usually "we need something, and on the surface of it this looks like it solves exactly that something". -- Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
