On Mon, 13 Jan 2014 16:46:08 +0100 Tom Wijsman <tom...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Jan 2014 16:38:59 +0100 > Luis Ressel <ara...@aixah.de> wrote: > > > On Mon, 13 Jan 2014 15:58:13 +0100 > > Tom Wijsman <tom...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > > > Half a minute if you disable backtracking which you don't need. :) > > > > Which sadly also means that some updates get skipped silently. > > (Those which would trigger rebuilds of other packages because of > > sub-slot deps, had that case yesterday). > > Can you give an example of that? > > Rebuilds don't cause a different solution in the graph afaik; so, I > wouldn't see how that would form a big problem. I also think this > would still be covered by preserved-rebuild and/or revdep-rebuild > afterwards. No, the problem wasn't that rebuilds weren't done (btw: this is not about @preserved-rebuilds, but about subslot dependencies), but that updates which would trigger such rebuilds are silently ignored. This happened to me yesterday while trying --backtrack=0. The available update to dev-haskell/parsec simply didn't show up (haskell ebuilds make heavy use of subslot deps), I only noticed this because I knew there was in fact an update available (thanks to eix-diff). Only after enabling backtracking Portage found the update. This might well be a bug, perhaps I'll examine the situation when I've got more time. -- Luis Ressel <ara...@aixah.de> GPG fpr: F08D 2AF6 655E 25DE 52BC E53D 08F5 7F90 3029 B5BD
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
