On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 20:49:35 +0200 Fabian Groffen <[email protected]> wrote: > On 07-09-2012 19:21:57 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 20:17:17 +0200 > > Fabian Groffen <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Eh, no. Now it just always breaks when you perform a downgrade, > > > and revdev-rebuild or @preserved-libs won't help you. I prefer > > > that you give best practices how to use sub-slots to make Portage > > > also able to do a recompile of bar when libfnord in the same SLOT > > > gets downgraded. (Because minors are used for compatible changes > > > -- additions -- to the ABI.) > > > > Downgrades aren't covered by sub-slots, slots, regular dependencies, > > libtool, or anything else. > > It seems I mistakenly took slot-operator-deps and sub-slots as > something that can be mapped onto ABIs. Doing so, however has proven > to be wrong.
It's not entirely wrong. There's a reason we stopped using the word "ABI", though: it's a meaningless term with a lot of misleading connotations. > It appears slot-operator-deps do have some resemblance with ABI here > (especially if :* would be written in PMS such that it only allows > upgrades, no downgrades), but sub-slots are completely unrelated. Downgrades are a different, unrelated problem. If you're trying to solve that, you'll need a different, orthogonal solution. Note, though, that downgrade breakages are typically not covered by whatever you think an ABI is. -- Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
