On Sonntag, 7. Februar 2016, 23:17:59 CET wrote Brian K. White:
On 12/15/2015 10:47 AM, Henne Vogelsang wrote:
Hey,
On 15.12.2015 16:18, Olaf Hering wrote:
But see thr "If a pkg is in state "unresolvable" after commit, and the prjconf gets changed to solve the dependency no rebuild happens."
How about you create a bug report or better a pull-request? :-)
Henne
Apologies for dredging up an old thread.
Why is it more right to jump to the conclusion that it's a bug in need of a bug report, before asking if it even is a bug?
He really asked if there was a re-eval command, which seems like a perfectly reasonable question to start with. If the answer turns out to be "no such command exists", so what? How could he know that *before* finding out?
Yes, sorry. It is currently a wanted behaviour by design. Therefore Olaf is right to complain. Question is if we want to tackle this via an extra command or via a behaviour change of the scheduler. That needs some discussion ...
His response here is also quite rationally pointing out that the suggestion to edit the file was nonsensical, since he already said the file was edited.
Basically, to me it looks like you treated him like someone making demands, when he made no demands. Shall I add a disingenuous smiley too? No.
I don't have patience for people who expect me to do work for free just so they don't have to bother doing something they could and should do for themselves either, but if you are going to be intolerant like that (as I admit I am too), then you obligate yourself to be correct yourself, and only chastise the deserving.
Henne tried to involve more parties and the bug report would avoid that the issue get's lost. I can tell that it is a known issue, but the solution is not obvious, so the chances are high that a mail on a mailing list will not finally lead to a solution...
good morning :) adrian