[oe] python skills and bug 2412

[Richard Purdie]

On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 16:17 +0200, Paul Sokolovsky wrote:
> > On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 15:43 +0200, Paul Sokolovsky wrote:
> > A proper use for RPROVIDES is for something like gtk+-directfb to
> > RPROVIDE gtk+. If an app linked against one, it should be able to run
> > against the other (I'm assuming thats the case, if its not there
> > shouldn't be an RPROVIDES).
> 
> > Does that help explain things?
> 
>   Ok, in other words, you say that OE's, build-time, virtuals, are
> completely different thing than package manager's Provides facilities,
> also common called virtuals? 

Yes.

> And that then the easiest solution is to
> make sure they are never mixed at all, instead of trying to do
> mind-boggling and still very limited logic of converting OE's virtuals
> to package-manager virtuals? 

Yes.

> Instead, package-manager virtuals should
> be managed manually, based on the actual properties of packages?

Yes.

>   Makes sense. But with this ambiguity of "virtuals" such questions
> would come up again and again, I guess. So I also wished we cut off
> OE-virtual bleeding to package manager realm soon ;-).

Indeed. Thinking about this stuff makes my head hurt :).

PROVIDES + virtual/* = good
RPROVIDES + virtual/* = nightmare + bug

My point was that any of the latter will never do what people want/need
and should be removed. If we ever do that, we should use a namespace
other than "virtual" too.

Cheers,

Richard