Re: [gentoo-user] Changing dependencies without upping version ??

[Andreas K. Huettel]

Am Montag, 25. September 2017, 02:33:13 CEST schrieb Rich Freeman:
> On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 2:51 PM, John Blinka  wrote:
> >> Is this an officially approved technique??  it is DIRTY.
> > 
> > I imagine that it is sanctioned, otherwise why would there be a
> > --changed-deps flag to emerge?  Does seem dirty.  Glad you asked the
> > question.  Would love to learn why this is allowed.  In my experience, it
> > happens quite often.
> 
> Is this recent experience in the main repository?  This is something
> QA started cracking down on maybe a year ago.  It is definitely
> problematic, because portage won't pull in the new dependency until
> you re-install the package, which means the dependency could get
> removed/etc.  I'd have to dig up the details around the policy - it
> might be allowed in very limited circumstances (there could be reasons
> to change a dep that won't actually break anything already installed).
> 
> I ended up putting --changed-deps in my update script because I'd
> rather not deal with the bugs this can cause.

I think the debate somewhere ended at "it's maintainer's call, weighing 
unnecessary rebuilds versus technical correctness".

Not sure how time-consuming a qcustomplot is.


-- 
Andreas K. Hüttel
dilfri...@gentoo.org
Gentoo Linux developer (council, perl, libreoffice)

Re: [gentoo-user] Changing dependencies without upping version ??

[Paul Colquhoun]

On Monday, 25 September 2017 4:51:22 AM AEST John Blinka wrote:
> > Is this an officially approved technique??  it is DIRTY.
> 
> I imagine that it is sanctioned, otherwise why would there be a
> --changed-deps flag to emerge?  Does seem dirty.  Glad you asked the
> question.  Would love to learn why this is allowed.  In my experience, it
> happens quite often.


Well, --changed-deps is also there for when you change USE flags on your system 
to activate (or deactivate) software features.


-- 
Reverend Paul Colquhoun, ULC. http://andor.dropbear.id.au/
  Asking for technical help in newsgroups?  Read this first:
 http://catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html#intro

Re: [gentoo-user] Changing dependencies without upping version ??

[Rich Freeman]

On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 2:51 PM, John Blinka  wrote:
>
>> Is this an officially approved technique??  it is DIRTY.
>
> I imagine that it is sanctioned, otherwise why would there be a
> --changed-deps flag to emerge?  Does seem dirty.  Glad you asked the
> question.  Would love to learn why this is allowed.  In my experience, it
> happens quite often.

Is this recent experience in the main repository?  This is something
QA started cracking down on maybe a year ago.  It is definitely
problematic, because portage won't pull in the new dependency until
you re-install the package, which means the dependency could get
removed/etc.  I'd have to dig up the details around the policy - it
might be allowed in very limited circumstances (there could be reasons
to change a dep that won't actually break anything already installed).

I ended up putting --changed-deps in my update script because I'd
rather not deal with the bugs this can cause.

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] Changing dependencies without upping version ??

[Neil Bothwick]

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 10:37:53 -0700, Ian Zimmerman wrote:

> Is this an officially approved technique??  it is DIRTY.

If the change doesn't affect the installed code, it is encouraged to
avoid unnecessary rebuilding.

For example, a new version of LibreOffice or Chromium depends on libfoo,
but the dev doesn't notice and already has libfoo installed so it works
for him. You also have it installed so the upgrade works for you, then it
fails for me and I file a bug report. If the dev revbumped the ebuild,
you would have to spend a couple of hours rebuilding Chromium to get
exactly the same code you had before. By not revbumping it, he fixes the
problem for me without inconveniencing you.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

System halted - Press all keys at once to continue.


pgpDQf6rM9CF2.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-user] Changing dependencies without upping version ??

[John Blinka]

>
>
> Is this an officially approved technique??  it is DIRTY.


I imagine that it is sanctioned, otherwise why would there be a
--changed-deps flag to emerge?  Does seem dirty.  Glad you asked the
question.  Would love to learn why this is allowed.  In my experience, it
happens quite often.

John Blinka

>

[gentoo-user] Changing dependencies without upping version ??

[Ian Zimmerman]

I think this is the first time a package tried to play this trick on me:

--- /var/db/pkg/dev-libs/qcustomplot-1.3.2/qcustomplot-1.3.2.ebuild 
2017-05-21 13:38:15.482740587 -0700
+++ /usr/portage/dev-libs/qcustomplot/qcustomplot-1.3.2.ebuild  2017-09-22 
19:27:30.0 -0700
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# Copyright 1999-2016 Gentoo Foundation
+# Copyright 1999-2017 Gentoo Foundation
 # Distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License v2
 
 EAPI=6
@@ -14,19 +14,13 @@
 SLOT="0"
 LICENSE="GPL-3"
 KEYWORDS="amd64 ~arm x86 ~amd64-linux ~x86-linux"
-IUSE="qt5"
+IUSE=""
 
 RDEPEND="
-   !qt5? (
-   dev-qt/qtcore:4
-   dev-qt/qtgui:4
-   )
-   qt5? (
-   dev-qt/qtcore:5
-   dev-qt/qtgui:5
-   dev-qt/qtprintsupport:5
-   dev-qt/qtwidgets:5
-   )
+   dev-qt/qtcore:5
+   dev-qt/qtgui:5
+   dev-qt/qtprintsupport:5
+   dev-qt/qtwidgets:5
 "
 DEPEND="${RDEPEND}"
 
@@ -42,7 +36,7 @@
 }
 
 src_configure() {
-   use qt5 && eqmake5 || eqmake4
+   eqmake5
 }
 
 src_install() {


Is this an officially approved technique??  it is DIRTY.

-- 
Please don't Cc: me privately on mailing lists and Usenet,
if you also post the followup to the list or newsgroup.
Do obvious transformation on domain to reply privately _only_ on Usenet.