On 22 July 2014 19:25, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." <phajdan...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 7/21/14, 11:52 PM, Alexander Berntsen wrote: > > Michał has documented the shortcomings of dynamic deps in our wiki[0]. > > (Thank you!) This documentation also includes two of our possible > > solutions. > > > > [0] <https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Portage/Dynamic_dependencies> > > Thank you, this is very useful. I didn't understand the issue much > before reading that page. > > One question: why for "Removal of a USE flag along with the relevant > dependencies" dynamic deps say "revbump + unnecessary rebuild"? What > would happen without the revbump? > > > 1. Improve dynamic-deps. This is, as Michał pointed out earlier in > > this thread a pipe dream. > > Agreed. > > > 2. Remove dynamic-deps. This is what I think currently makes sense. > > +1 I also think it's the best option. > > Paweł > > Ok, we can side step this discussion partially: Lets pretend for a moment dynamic deps get banned. People will still unconsciously make that mistake and things will still break when they do. So we'll probably need a repoman check that is smart enough to know "X is modified" and compare the DEPEND fields with the previous incarnation prior to commit, and then at very least, warn people doing `repoman full` that they've modified the dependencies, and that a -r1 bump is thus highly recommended. And that check can be added *now* prior to banning/disabling dynamic deps. And people who want to pay attention to that warning can start doing it before policy dictates they must. -- Kent *KENTNL* - https://metacpan.org/author/KENTNL
