Am Mittwoch, 18. November 2015, 12:12:05 schrieb Alexander Berntsen: > On 18/11/15 12:05, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > Only that there is no real difference to the existing situation > > when mixing stable and unstable. It is not guaranteed that all > > dependencies of an unstable package are stable, so already now > > users may have to accept the ~ keyword for dependencies in some > > cases. Similarly, such users may have to accept EAPI 6 for some > > dependencies, which implies that they install a package manager > > supporting EAPI 6. > > There's a difference between some packages being troublesome, and > encouraging everyone to rewrite their eclasses and ebuilds, if the end > result is a huge portion of ebuilds causing headaches.
Well, at some point it has to be introduced in the main tree. Can you prove at any point that portage is 100% correct? Also, adding EAPI=6 support to eclasses mostly consists of adding branches to case statements. I.e. the new code paths will never run on old EAPI. > > And on what basis would you stabilise Portage, when there are no > > ebuilds in the tree to test its EAPI 6 code? > > When I do QA in projects I'm involved with (at least outside of > Gentoo), we don't do it live on end-user systems. I'll leave the > details as an exercise for the Gentoo developer. So, I suggest you branch gentoo.git, start adding some new ebuilds to it (don't forget to use a random combination of eclasses, like perl-module, python-r1, kde4-base ...), update your system and check for all possible resolver oddities... Too much work? Tough. -- Andreas K. Huettel Gentoo Linux developer (council, perl, libreoffice) dilfri...@gentoo.org http://www.akhuettel.de/
