On Thursday 13 September 2007 05:32:07 Mark Knecht wrote: > That's very interesting. What about slotting issues? What if it's the > old version in a slot that needs to be rebuilt? (FYI - I don't really > understand slotting that much since I don't program. I've guessed it's > because some code needs old libraries, etc., and somehow slotting > takes care of that.)
Slotting just allows two or more versions of a package to be installed at the same time. It's up to the maintainer to ensure that they don't interfere with each other so there's no magic in it.. > Does -X install the latest version in the specific slot? It should. Unfortunately revdep-rebuild has a few bugs at the moment. So in the case of apr-util the latest stable version of revdep-rebuild will remerge the wrong version of apr-util (see bug #189720 for details). And of course latest ~arch version has a few other bugs at the moment (most of which are fixed in svn but not yet released).. :p > Anyway, I've wondered at times about just removing all the specific > revision numbers but I'm wary of going beyond my comfort zone and then > ending up in a state that's more difficult to fix. -X will certainly do a better job than just removing all specific revision numbers manually. > Maybe the revdep-rebuild guys should (could?) include -X if it's the > right thing to do? The latest ~arch version does have -X as default. Once the bugs in that gets fixed it'll do a much better job than the current stable version. -- Bo Andresen
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
