On 03/06/15 01:30, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On 03 Jun 2015 00:28, Michael Palimaka wrote: >> On 02/06/15 23:52, Mike Frysinger wrote: >>> On 02 Jun 2015 23:07, Michael Palimaka wrote: >>>> On 02/06/15 21:38, Mike Frysinger wrote: >>>>> On 02 Jun 2015 20:47, Michael Palimaka wrote: >>>>>> On 02/06/15 17:04, Michał Górny wrote: >>>>>>> Dnia 2015-06-02, o godz. 03:58:35 >>>>>>> "Michael Sterrett (mr_bones_)" <mr_bon...@gentoo.org> napisał(a): >>>>>>>> -DEPEND="readline? ( sys-libs/readline ) >>>>>>>> +DEPEND="readline? ( sys-libs/readline:0 ) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This should be actually := (or :0=) for both deps since gnugo links to >>>>>>> them. This also applies to your remaining 'warning silencing' commits. >>>>>> >>>>>> Why? Blindly adding the subslot dep is a bad idea. >>>>> >>>>> in this particular case, the subslot usage is what we want since we're >>>>> compiling+linking against it. using readline:0 vs readline is still an >>>>> improvement though. >>>>> >>>>> we also want a subslot on ncurses since we compile+link against it. >>>>> >>>>> i think it's pretty uncommon to use readline in a package and not want a >>>>> subslot. your package would have to be doing something uncommon like >>>>> dlopening it since the only thing readline provides is a library ... >>>> >>>> Neither readline nor ncurses define an explicit subslot, so I don't know >>>> what their future meaning might be. >>> >>> their meaning would be the reasonable one -- to track the SONAME. while it >>> hasn't been deployed yet (due to those packages being on EAPI=4), i don't >>> know >>> what other value you'd expect it to be. they've both broken their SONAMEs >>> in >>> the past. readline in particular has been every major version (4.x, 5.x, >>> 6.x). >> >> Since you've clarified the future meaning for ncurses/readline, it's not >> a problem. >> >> The point was it's not a good idea to use the operator unless without >> knowing what it means for the package in question (since a subslot can >> be used to handle a number of different situations, as I wrote previously). > > you make a reasonable point, but i'd consider some of your examples as > (ab|mis)use of subslots. their purpose is to track ABI changes so as > to signal rebuilds. if they've been appropriated for other uses, then > perhaps those libraries are doing it wrong ? i expect subslots to do > one thing (what PMS describes/intends) and would be surprised to find > out that some packages are doing something else. > -mike >
They're still tracking ABI changes to signal rebuilds - they just don't apply to all consumers. poppler's subslot tracks the main libpoppler which frequently breaks, but the package also provides libpoppler-qt4 which is stable - these consumers never need rebuilding.
