On Friday 30 December 2005 22:13, Spider (DmD Lj) wrote: > it would block against "requirement of same package with different SLOT. > > However, since the ~ atoms are explicit and separate ( this depend tree > could as well be called : > app-text/docbook-sgml-dtd:3.0 > app-text/docbook-sgml-dtd:3.1 > app-text/docbook-sgml-dtd:4.0 > app-text/docbook-sgml-dtd:4.1 > > Which, for some reason, should be supported : ) > > Either by casing out appearances where multiple SLOTs are depended on by > -one- package, or by saying that ~ is special-cased due to its stricter > limitations, which would make it pass by the SLOT check. > > ( no, its not an elegant solution, but it might work ;)
Inelegant solutions gets us no further than where we are now. ;) A still inelegant solution, but one that I could live with, is to leave SLOT handling as it is now and to take Brian's syntax of key:slot,slot using it specifically for the case where a set of ebuilds must all use the same slot. Hence, rather than digikam and friends having "|| ( kdelibs:3.4 kdelibs:3.5 )" each would have just "kdelibs:3.4,3.5". It still sounds messy given the current redesign of atom handling, but it would seem to offer a better chance of not being bug-ridden... -- Jason Stubbs -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
