[arch-general] A suggestion for the devs regarding rebuilds

[Ray Rashif]

On 9 February 2010 17:50, Xavier Chantry <chantry.xavier at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 3:19 AM, Arvid Picciani <aep at exys.org> wrote:
>>
>> if someone actually posts patches or other constructive stuff, please CC
>> me. We're rewriting pacman anyway and looking for a solution to handle
>> this mess in particular.
>>
>> Right now the only idea i got is versioned deps which is sort of flawed
>> since that would assert a certain awareness upstream. And if we had
>> that, we didnt have the problem in the first place...
>>
>> maybe there is a smarter way to force update of packages that would break
>> when their dependencies are updated.
>>
>
> If people actually read my 10 lines mail, and spent more time to think
> and less time to write, maybe the thread could have gone forward
> rather than backward ?

Not only did that fail to garner any attention, but my repeated
emphasis on that initiative seems to have gone to waste as well.

> But then: pacman knows that A is installed and
> depends on libfoo.so.1. But still it removes
> that library. Why ? I'd just say it fails to
> do its job, part of which is being aware of
> dependencies.

Fons, you may be right here. That is exactly what is being discussed
with regards to sodepends/soprovides. The thing is, your message was
not clear and is catalyst for a number of unhelpful remarks/opinions.
>From one point, you appear to be wanting some kind of mechanism to
keep old libraries in place which simply cannot happen because it's
the same package "updating", so the new contents of the package is
replacing the old. We cannot keep both packages in the repos because
that violates our principles. However, we may be able to prevent you
from doing certain actions or in the case of sodepends, we may at
least be able to inform you what is broken and what is not.

As with the userbase changing, I have to agree. I've watched Arch and
its mediums of communications for over 3 years, and like any distro
with good reason to exist, there is always an increase in userbase.
There are users who are simply too elitist. These are usually the ones
who come crying for help, and a few months later start picking on
others who do the same. There are users who are just unfit, and we
have long ignored these kinds but the new elites just have to press
the button. Obviously, Fons isn't either.

Please stop any suggestion that involves "keeping things". Channel
your sparks into how pacman could provide necessary information to the
user during major updates.

> I guess it is for some ideas here:
> http://www.hereticlinux.org/wiki/pacideas

Is that the brainchild of aep? If so, there's no surprise. He was into
Qt at one point, then something else, and now this. Heresy is aep, aep
is Heresy. Good luck Arvid!


--
GPG/PGP ID: B42DDCAD