From: "Mauricio Fernández" <batsman.geo@...>
Date: 2004-10-29T02:46:05+09:00
Subject: Re: Gems as key? Re: The real Ruby vs. Python.

On Thu, Oct 28, 2004 at 11:04:01PM +0900, Ara.T.Howard@noaa.gov wrote:
> >RubyGems' versioning model makes it difficult to track reverse
> >dependencies: currently user intervention is required to ensure no
> >dependencies are broken on uninstall, and the installation/removal
> >of a RubyGems package plus its dependencies isn't performed as a
> >transaction. There are also some essentially unsolvable issues at runtime
> >(unsatisfiable dependencies).
> 
> when a package is installed - do you store dags of the dependancies 
> somewhere
> then?  i guess it would need to be a single dag (at least logically) so you
> could detect problems on uninstall huh?

It is easy to rebuild the graph on uninstall, based on the stored
dependency information. rpa-base also has a mark and sweep garbage
collector (like Ruby :) to reclaim unneeded packages. It is very useful
for "build dependencies", but that concept doesn't exist in RubyGems so
they're not in dire need of that.

-- 
Running Debian GNU/Linux Sid (unstable)
batsman dot geo at yahoo dot com