On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 08:30:17 +0900 Jason Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday 30 March 2006 01:21, Marius Mauch wrote: > > Marius Mauch schrieb: > > > So after manifest2 is in, I'll revive the other issue that IMO is > > > a requirement for 2.1: enforcing dependencies needed to use the > > > tree (see old threads or glep44 for reasoning). > > Can you summarise the reasoning again please? a) avoid massive breakage when certain new features are introduced (past examples being cascading profiles or new-style virtuals) b) similar to a) allow people to use new features without having to wait for a year or two > > - at sync time first check the tree format of the remote tree, if > > we can't handle it the sync is aborted > > While I haven't checked over the code at all, the point above above > sounds problematic. What happens if the a user installs the latest > with this patch and then doesn't sync for three years? The tree may > then require a later portage but the user can't sync to be able to > emerge a later portage. !!! This upgrade might fail, in that case please read the !!! following documents for help: !!! http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/portage/doc/common-problems.xml !!! http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/portage/doc/manually-fixing-portage.xml These docs will then tell the user about the following options a) use the secret override b) manually update the tree with wget+tar c) perform an manual update (as in wget portage-version.tar.bz2, ...) That should be an extreme exception though, there will be some rules regarding format bumps (like "only use formats where that haven been supported by stable portage for n months"). Marius -- [email protected] mailing list
