On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 21:37:11 +0100 Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 22:36:14 +0200 > Marien Zwart <mari...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > On za, 2012-06-23 at 17:08 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > > > Is it that Paludis installs a newer SLOT even if a reverse > > > dependency > > > > explicitly requests another SLOT? Sounds like a bug to me. > > > > > > No, it's that if a user requests a "complete" resolution, Paludis > > > installs the newest version of things that it can. Extensive > > > consultation with users has shown that this is a good behaviour, > > > except > > > in the small number of situations that have recently arisen where > > > people are doing weird things with versions and slots. > > > > It surprises me that this behavior is normally desirable for > > packages where all dependencies (including any in the world set or > > the like) are slotted. > > Think || ( a:3 a:2 ). So now that you've stated the problem, maybe it's a good time to find a proper solution for it. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
