Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] DB and binary dependency

2006-03-26 Thread Paul de Vrieze
On Friday 24 March 2006 15:24, tvali wrote: Unfortunately, your wrong. This only makes sure that you have the right slots to put your squares, triangles and circles in. It does not say that b(int,int) from the first lib actually does the same thing as b(int,int) from the second library.

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] DB and binary dependency

2006-03-24 Thread tvali
On 24/03/06, Paul de Vrieze [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thursday 23 March 2006 21:35, tvali wrote: BINSLOT is a new word for me. Ok BINSLOT is normally slot. However in some cases packages are in the same slot, but not binary compatible (like their libraries having a different SONAME e.g.

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] DB and binary dependency

2006-03-24 Thread Brian Harring
On Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 01:40:01PM +0200, tvali wrote: On 24/03/06, Paul de Vrieze [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thursday 23 March 2006 21:38, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri wrote: Cons: - it's not the final solution to the problem, as said, interfaces would be better... but interfaces would

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] DB and binary dependency

2006-03-24 Thread tvali
On 24/03/06, Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Checking the interfaces/symbols sucks however, because you can only do it _after_ you've built whatever you're building (packages do adjust the defines/typedefs/structs dependant on configure/build options). As I stated earlier, bincompat

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] DB and binary dependency

2006-03-24 Thread Paul de Vrieze
On Friday 24 March 2006 12:40, tvali wrote: Interface can be made somewhat automatically checkable. For example: void a(int); void b(int, int); void b(int, char); Is compatible with: void a(int); void b(int, int); Unfortunately, your wrong. This only makes sure that you have the right

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] DB and binary dependency

2006-03-24 Thread Paul de Vrieze
On Friday 24 March 2006 13:10, Brian Harring wrote: As I stated earlier, bincompat (not binslot paul :P) is the route to If you want to call it bincompat, I'd have to insist to make it BINCOMPAT ;-). go- it gives you up front information so a resolver can plan out what has to be rebuilt

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] DB and binary dependency

2006-03-24 Thread tvali
On 24/03/06, Paul de Vrieze [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Friday 24 March 2006 12:40, tvali wrote: Interface can be made somewhat automatically checkable. For example: void a(int); void b(int, int); void b(int, char); Is compatible with: void a(int); void b(int, int);

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] DB and binary dependency

2006-03-23 Thread tvali
Can someone tell me, which portage python commands should be used or which kind of file created, if i'm going to test this idea? -- in beginning, i would like to just add simple deps - are ebuilds the only place to change and is there any clear doc of them [as i wouldnt like to go through them all

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] DB and binary dependency

2006-03-23 Thread Alec Warner
tvali wrote: Can someone tell me, which portage python commands should be used or which kind of file created, if i'm going to test this idea? -- in beginning, i would like to just add simple deps - are ebuilds the only place to change and is there any clear doc of them [as i wouldnt like to

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] DB and binary dependency

2006-03-23 Thread tvali
On 23/03/06, Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: tvali wrote: Can someone tell me, which portage python commands should be used or which kind of file created, if i'm going to test this idea? -- in beginning, i would like to just add simple deps - are ebuilds the only place to change and

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] DB and binary dependency

2006-03-23 Thread tvali
>From Paul de Vrieze:The semantics that make up the relationships between useflags and the actual source as goes out of the preprocessor is very complicated. Probably theeasiest way to find it out is to try each permutation and somehow hook intogcc/g++ to get the result of that choice.And that's

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] DB and binary dependency

2006-03-23 Thread Paul de Vrieze
On Thursday 23 March 2006 20:53, tvali wrote: So this interaction is one more thing to get simpler? I'm starting to think that i should seek for some very-very small part of portage to develop, because size of things [amount of work], which i already think i should improve in some way, is

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] DB and binary dependency

2006-03-23 Thread tvali
On 23/03/06, Paul de Vrieze [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Certainly,chroot combined with lvm snapshots would be the easiest way.If you want to focus on binary packages, you might want to start with notdoing it automatically, but using some crude heuristics. You can make it configurable for when the

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] DB and binary dependency

2006-03-23 Thread Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri
Ok... this discussion is missing my initial point that is how to provide binary dependency and avoid many crashes we have now with almost no effort. My initial proposal was to, after compile and before install is done, we should parse linker information and check for each library it depends,

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] DB and binary dependency

2006-03-23 Thread tvali
On 23/03/06, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ok... this discussion is missing my initial point that is how toprovide binary dependency and avoid many crashes we have now withalmost no effort. Paul was not missing it ;) Part of his message was for me, part was for you. I have

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] DB and binary dependency

2006-03-23 Thread solar
This thread keeps going and going and it's a subject thats already been covered... So I'll just Re you here. Search the archives here for RRDEPEND, LDEPEND As soon as I can figure out a way in python to do fast lookups of libs it will be integrated. I can do it really really fast in c but I

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] DB and binary dependency

2006-03-22 Thread Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri
On 3/20/06, tvali [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2006/3/20, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I do think you're overcomplicating things where you shouldn't. Declaring stuff manually will always break, and to ensure a safe system, it's better to use compiler information. In all

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] DB and binary dependency

2006-03-22 Thread tvali
I was thinking about it, too, and found something i do like maybe more. It would be not binary, but code dependancy. This is limited to specific languages, then, but after all, there may also be different binary dependencies, too [for example, you may depend on fonts images from another package].

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] DB and binary dependency

2006-03-22 Thread tvali
I hope you did read my previous mail of code dependancy -- if not, it's at the end of message. This here is not so much overthought thing, but a good starting point, maybe, if code deps are used. Anyway, i give here the same idea in more complete form and good syntax (good, because it could be

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] DB and binary dependency

2006-03-22 Thread Patrick Lauer
On Wed, 2006-03-22 at 19:40 +0200, tvali wrote: I was thinking about it, too, and found something i do like maybe more. It would be not binary, but code dependancy. This is limited to specific languages, then, but after all, there may also be different binary dependencies, too [for example,

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] DB and binary dependency

2006-03-22 Thread tvali
2006/3/22, Patrick Lauer [EMAIL PROTECTED]: There are a few reasons why this won't work :-)First: What if I have assembler? python? perl?Your example is limited to the C preprocessor. Yes that i did tell there that it's limited to c already :) but bin dep, after all, is limited to lib dependencies

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] DB and binary dependency

2006-03-22 Thread tvali
As an addition to code deps discussion. I didnt understand exactly, why bin deps were supposed to be better than what we have now, as i am not yet exactly sure what we have :) Anyway, i see one basic plus of code deps. It's that you may have huge number of codelines, all containing #defines and

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] DB and binary dependency

2006-03-20 Thread Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri
I'm replying to this one, but I've read the whole thread... On 3/16/06, Paul de Vrieze [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wednesday 15 March 2006 16:13, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri wrote: Hello, There is any provision for binary dependency on Gentoo/Portage? The way it works now is quite messy

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] DB and binary dependency

2006-03-16 Thread Paul de Vrieze
On Wednesday 15 March 2006 16:13, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri wrote: Hello, There is any provision for binary dependency on Gentoo/Portage? The way it works now is quite messy with things like revdep-rebuild. I have an idea to solve this problem: after software is build, you check which files

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] DB and binary dependency

2006-03-16 Thread tvali
To make this things worse, the above example assumes that within a slot, the libraries are binary compatible. There are examples of libraries that are not. And what about a library whose interface is dependent on a third library: B uses A, C uses B, but B exports A. So B is dependent on A, and

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] DB and binary dependency

2006-03-16 Thread Brian Harring
On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 02:58:00PM +0100, Paul de Vrieze wrote: On Wednesday 15 March 2006 16:13, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri wrote: Hello, There is any provision for binary dependency on Gentoo/Portage? The way it works now is quite messy with things like revdep-rebuild. Solving this is

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] DB and binary dependency

2006-03-16 Thread Paul de Vrieze
On Thursday 16 March 2006 15:18, tvali wrote: To make this things worse, the above example assumes that within a slot, the libraries are binary compatible. There are examples of libraries that are not. And what about a library whose interface is dependent on a third library: B uses A, C

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] DB and binary dependency

2006-03-16 Thread Paul de Vrieze
On Thursday 16 March 2006 15:24, Brian Harring wrote: I would have called bincompat BINSLOT, but the idea is the same. As per the norm, requires a smart resolver; for c++ would expect cycles to occur where the only solution is to pull in libstdc++ (fex) to sidestep horkage while doing the

[gentoo-portage-dev] DB and binary dependency

2006-03-15 Thread Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri
Hello, There is any provision for binary dependency on Gentoo/Portage? The way it works now is quite messy with things like revdep-rebuild. I have an idea to solve this problem: after software is build, you check which files it links (ldd binaries libraries) and check the used against installed