On Fri, Apr 9, 2021 at 5:19 PM Sam James <s...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > > > On 10 Apr 2021, at 01:13, Michael Orlitzky <m...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > > On Sat, 2021-04-10 at 00:32 +0100, Sam James wrote: > >> > >> > >> Yes, this is the part I find difficult too. The important > >> distinction here was *bootstrapping* (which I missed) > >> but I think at least we should make a list of packages generally considered > >> critical for bootstrap. > >> > > > > What is a bootstrap package? > > > > There is some chicken-and-egg problem to be solved, but I don't think > > that we should be assuming that e.g. GNU grep is always present just > > because, during the base case of some recursive process, POSIX grep > > must be available temporarily. > > > > Anyway, https://bugs.gentoo.org/485356 awaits reopening if you make any > > progress on this. > > > > Oh, I agree completely. CCed myself on the bug and added to the list > to think about/work on. > > I’m pleased a bug existed in the past! I don’t agree with it being closed > though: > documentation issues can exist without a patch existing to fix them yet, > right?
I worry a lot about more complex dependencies trees (imagine all of the exciting cycles in the currently excluded @system depgraph.) Remember that while in theory it would be great if portage knew about all of them; computing these nodes and edges isn't free. I question what we are really buying with the extra complexity. -A
