(d) Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes flamee...@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
On 13 October 2014 17:58, Michael Orlitzky <m...@gentoo.org> wrote: > I've got two obsolete packages masked currently: app-text/unix2dos and > app-doc/djbdns-man. Both of them block other stable packages, > app-text/dos2unix and net-dns/djbdns respectively. > > Fortunately, both of them have had version/revision bumps since the > blocker so we can remove the blocker from the newer ebuild and then > stabilize that, at which point there's no problem. But I wonder, what > would be the best way to handle the situation if no version/revision > bump had occurred? > > In other words, suppose that net-dns/djbdns-1.05-r30 didn't exist. In > -r29, I have, > > KEYWORDS="alpha amd64 hppa ~mips ppc ppc64 sparc x86" > DEPEND="!app-doc/djbdns-man" > > and app-doc/djbdns-man is now hard masked. Suppose I remove djbdns-man > from the tree -- what do I do about the blocker? I see a couple of options: > > a) Edit the stable ebuild with ones fingers crossed > > b) Do a revbump and wait it out > > c) Do a revbump and file a stablereq immediately > > d) Do nothing, will repoman tolerate that? > > > (b) is obviously safest, but (c) seems reasonable as well all things > considered. Will the answer change when portage drops dynamic deps? > >
