-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 08/08/14 03:56 PM, Kent Fredric wrote: > > On 9 August 2014 07:34, Peter Stuge <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > ebuilds often (for me) have artificial dependencies, when the > actual version required is too old to be in the tree, but maybe not > too old to be installed on an existing system. > > > > The inverse is also true, sometimes you see people go: > > "Well, upstream requires Foo 1.5 at least, but we have 2.0 as the > oldest in tree, so we can just say dev-whatever/Foo and be done > with it" > > Which turns out to be horribly wrong if somebody still has Foo 1.4 > installed, for whatever reason. > > And this is just one reason why being excessively lazy about what > you upgrade could be secretly detrimental. >
Also very true. I don't think we have any sort of tree-wide policy on this either, do we? Although I believe common sense says it's a good idea (and i hope most devs do this) to put a minver on a dependency atom if there was any ebuild with an older version in the tree within the last year. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iF4EAREIAAYFAlPlMC4ACgkQ2ugaI38ACPDUrgD+OiVN6HQKxNAOusj8PYI1O421 Dq2ihfhuQMz2HszG9DoBAJdTZJ9pRM6cFbkN+tcwFc/CAZUiWBe9MsSfoLkqho/C =T+NJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
