Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] want_restart_for_use_change: backtrack only if needed (bug 632598)

2017-10-02 Thread Zac Medico
On 10/02/2017 09:52 AM, Brian Dolbec wrote: > On Sat, 30 Sep 2017 19:48:21 -0700 > Zac Medico wrote: > >> Only backtrack if changes break a USE dependency. Prior >> to this fix, the included test case succeeded only with >> a --backtrack setting of 3 or more, but now it

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] want_restart_for_use_change: backtrack only if needed (bug 632598)

2017-10-02 Thread Brian Dolbec
On Sat, 30 Sep 2017 19:48:21 -0700 Zac Medico wrote: > Only backtrack if changes break a USE dependency. Prior > to this fix, the included test case succeeded only with > a --backtrack setting of 3 or more, but now it succeeds > with a --backtrack setting of 2. > >

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] postinst-qa-check.d: Skip checks if required tools are missing

2017-10-02 Thread Zac Medico
On 10/02/2017 08:36 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/631820 > --- > bin/postinst-qa-check.d/50gnome2-utils | 2 ++ > bin/postinst-qa-check.d/50xdg-utils| 4 > 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/bin/postinst-qa-check.d/50gnome2-utils >

[gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] postinst-qa-check.d: Skip checks if required tools are missing

2017-10-02 Thread Michał Górny
Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/631820 --- bin/postinst-qa-check.d/50gnome2-utils | 2 ++ bin/postinst-qa-check.d/50xdg-utils| 4 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+) diff --git a/bin/postinst-qa-check.d/50gnome2-utils b/bin/postinst-qa-check.d/50gnome2-utils index 569633fe3..7f1b0b847