Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH 0/2] RFC: Introducing ldso switching to BLAS/LAPACK
On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 12:37 PM Benda Xu wrote: > > Mike Gilbert writes: > > > This looks a lot safer than yesterday's patch since there are no > > ebuild removals here. > > Thank you Mike. > > > If/when you do want to remove old ebuilds, I suggest creating a github > > PR, and let the CI bot check reverse dependencies. > > Yeah, that would have been a much safer way to remove ebuilds. > > > This was actually done for the change that was reverted yesterday, but > > it seems like the CI results were ignored and the commit was pushed > > regardless. > > Yesterday the original pull requests by Mo did not remove ebuilds. It > was only when I started to adopt the PR that I saw > > > RepoMan scours the neighborhood... > > repo.eapi-deprecated 1 > >virtual/cblas/cblas-1.0.ebuild: 5 > > after which I impulsively killed it. Ah, that makes more sense.
Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH 0/2] RFC: Introducing ldso switching to BLAS/LAPACK
Mike Gilbert writes: > This looks a lot safer than yesterday's patch since there are no > ebuild removals here. Thank you Mike. > If/when you do want to remove old ebuilds, I suggest creating a github > PR, and let the CI bot check reverse dependencies. Yeah, that would have been a much safer way to remove ebuilds. > This was actually done for the change that was reverted yesterday, but > it seems like the CI results were ignored and the commit was pushed > regardless. Yesterday the original pull requests by Mo did not remove ebuilds. It was only when I started to adopt the PR that I saw > RepoMan scours the neighborhood... > repo.eapi-deprecated 1 >virtual/cblas/cblas-1.0.ebuild: 5 after which I impulsively killed it. I should take this lesson and be more careful removing ebuilds. Yours, Benda
Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH 0/2] RFC: Introducing ldso switching to BLAS/LAPACK
On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 2:16 AM wrote: > > From: Benda Xu > > The following 2 patches are to introduce the runtime switching > mechanism to BLAS/LAPACK libraries in Gentoo. > > This feature is turned off by default and only the reference > BLAS/LAPACK is used to satisfy the dependencies. It can be enabled by > USE=eselect-ldso. > > > Sorry for the glitch to the tree caused by my mistake yesterday. I am > looking forward to your review. I am cross posting to -dev and -sci > so as to attract atention from all interested parties. This looks a lot safer than yesterday's patch since there are no ebuild removals here. If/when you do want to remove old ebuilds, I suggest creating a github PR, and let the CI bot check reverse dependencies. This was actually done for the change that was reverted yesterday, but it seems like the CI results were ignored and the commit was pushed regardless.
