On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 08:25:31 -0800 Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 05:06:51PM +0100, Marius Mauch wrote: > > Sometimes a package has to depend on a specific version of a > > slotted package being the "active" one to build correctly, like in > > the current "tr1" discussion on -dev [1] or with packages that > > depend on the running kernel. > > tr1 is partially addressed via addition of a 'binding' modifier for > rdeps, to state that ||() deps are locked down after compilation. And how would that solve the actual issue of expressing "I need /usr/bin/gcc to run gcc-4.1 and not gcc-3.4"? The lockdown of || deps is a completely separate issue, unless I'm missing something. > > The idea is to add a special category (let's call it "active" for > > now) that has the following properties: > > - this category doesn't exist in portdir or vdb (= no ebuilds) > > - when portage ($pkgmanager) encounters a "active/foo" atom in a > > dependency string it executes some special code (e.g. > > "$PORTDIR/scripts/active-check/foo =active/foo-1") to determine if > > that atom is satisfied > > Non deterministic resolution; previous steps in the graph can cause > that value to flip to a different setting by the time the 'dep' is > encountered. Ok, that's a problem, though for the use cases at hand (gcc and kernel) it would be mostly irrelevant. > That's ignoring the kick in the nads usage of this will due to > resolution... Neglectable IMO, it's not such a common use case anyway, and I don't think I have to compare it to the current "solution" (die in setup or compile). > > (and yes, this kinda goes with multi-repo/multi-format support) > > Don't really see how this enables multiple standalone repos in any > sane way, so that one requires justification... Where did I say anything about enabling? It would need more or less a separate repository (dbapi) instance, so it would require such support. Marius -- gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
