Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
net-p2p/monero: limit boost dep version
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history 
monero-project/monero#9596

Signed-off-by: Sergey Alirzaev <[email protected]>
  • Loading branch information
@l29ah
l29ah committed Dec 14, 2024
1 parent e407d8d commit 6b08df8
Showing 1 changed file with 1 addition and 1 deletion.
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion net-p2p/monero/monero-0.18.3.4-r1.ebuild
View file
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ RESTRICT="test"
DEPEND="
acct-group/monero
acct-user/monero
dev-libs/boost:=[nls]
<dev-libs/boost-1.87:=[nls]
dev-libs/libsodium:=
dev-libs/openssl:=
dev-libs/randomx
Expand Down

9 comments on commit 6b08df8

@CyberTailor
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Revbump could be necessary

@l29ah
Copy link
Contributor Author

@l29ah l29ah commented on 6b08df8 Dec 14, 2024 via email

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@CyberTailor
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not sure how to interpret this:

Examples of changes that warrant a new revision are:

  • restricting a runtime dependency version, unless the := subslot operator is going to trigger a rebuild

https://devmanual.gentoo.org/general-concepts/ebuild-revisions/index.html

@CyberTailor
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

(It's safer to revbump when not sure, so that's why I'm suggesting it)

@l29ah
Copy link
Contributor Author

@l29ah l29ah commented on 6b08df8 Dec 14, 2024 via email

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@CyberTailor
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Policies exist for a reason.

Problems introduced by packages with stale dependencies are listed here:
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Portage/Changed_dependencies

Portage previously supported dynamic dependencies but they are deprecated in favor of revbumps
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Portage/Dynamic_dependencies

@l29ah
Copy link
Contributor Author

@l29ah l29ah commented on 6b08df8 Dec 14, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Those are broad reasons, and i don't see any of them matching this case. Could you please narrow down your reason for a revbump?
Do you even read the links you post?

@CyberTailor
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Without revbump, package manager doesn't know dependencies were changed in the ebuild.

When a new revision is installed, portage updates its VDB (/var/db/pkg) with new metadata.

@l29ah
Copy link
Contributor Author

@l29ah l29ah commented on 6b08df8 Dec 14, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What makes you think it doesn't?
/var/db/pkg describes installed packages, while the package in question is not installable in the now-constrained dependency case.

Please sign in to comment.