On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 09:28:05PM +0000, Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Tue, 5 Nov 2013 08:29:59 -0600, Bruce Hill wrote: > > > I can't understand the *need* for the new slot/subslot philosophy. > > The need to it is clear. Previous methods worked by breaking things and > then fixing them, hopefully before the breakage became a problem, > whenever library APIs changed. Subslots are an attempt to deal with this > proactively by fixing the problems as they occur. > > Whether subslots are the best way to do it, and whether the > implementation is ideal, as separate questions, but there is no doubt > that any system that relies on the existence of revdep-rebuild is > seriously flawed. > > To my mind, the question is not "are subslots needed" but "are they the > best solution to this problem".
You misread my statement, also. It is in alignment with your last sentence. -- Happy Penguin Computers >') 126 Fenco Drive ( \ Tupelo, MS 38801 ^^ supp...@happypenguincomputers.com 662-269-2706 662-205-6424 http://happypenguincomputers.com/ A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? Don't top-post: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post#Top-posting
