On Mon, 26 Dec 2005 21:09:31 +0100 Carsten Lohrke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | I wonder if portage deals fine with subtle dependency | incompatibilities, when one package has foo[!bar] and another one | foo[bar] as dependency and spits out a reasonable error message to | apply mutual blockers.
If they're purely in DEPEND, that one isn't even an incompatability. | > kde-libs/kde:3 | > ^^^ need any kde, with slotting enabled. | > | > kde-libs/kde:3,4 | > ^^^ need any kde, slotting 3 or 4. | > | > Combination? Not set in stone afaik, the implementation I have | > sitting in saviour doesn't care about the ordering however. | | This is the one I'm entirely not sure what it is good for. To me it | looks more like a workaround for missing dependency ranges, but it | won't solve any issue for KDE related packages. Well, any library that changes ABI should use a different SLOT for each revision. So SLOT depends should be able to replace the need for = and ~ and < and <= dependencies entirely. Which is a good thing, since those atoms make dependency resolution a general-case unsolvable problem. | As a general remark I'd like to know if and how this enhanced | dependency syntax is ordered. :[], []: or is both allowed!? What if | we find out, that we need to consider another factor, later? :[]<>? | Wouldn't it be better to have a extensible scheme, like e.g. | $category/$ebuild[use:foo,!bar;slot:x,y] ? The existing syntax is just as extensible. Up the EABI revision, and start adding new syntax as needed. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (I can kill you with my brain) Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
