On Mon, 18 May 2009 13:04:27 +0300 Alex Alexander <alex.alexan...@gmail.com> wrote: > Unfortunately we've got reports from paludis users stating that they > can't update QT from qting-edge anymore.
Paludis treats blocks as strong, the way Portage used to and the way
PMS defined them until we had to retroactively change it to allow
Portage's newer behaviour...
> 1) Is there a saner way to achieve our goal of doing whatever is
> possible to avoid mixed QT versions?
Not really. There's no particularly good mechanism for ensuring equal
versions of things where not everything has to be installed. The best
option I can think of is to have a meta package called, say, split-qt,
and to do all your external (not inter-qt-library) dependencies as:
x11-libs/split-qt[gui][xmlpatterns]
and then have x11-libs/split-qt's deps be like:
gui? ( ~x11-libs/qt-gui-${PV} )
> 2) Is our implementation considered correct and acceptable by the PMS
> guys?
The way PMS defines blockers has been rewritten to allow both what
Portage used to do and what Portage now does. It's fairly horrible, but
unfortunately Zac changed Portage's behaviour (breaking anything that
relied upon strong blockers, hence the quickly-hacked-in !! blocker
hack) without EAPI control.
--
Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
