qt5 is introducing subslots to cover an uncommon case where a package uses a private API. Your package has bogus subslot dependencies which will cause unnecessary rebuilds with USE="qt5".
So how about you use subslots for common cases rather than reusing them for unlikely cases where a few packages are going to cause pain upon everyone else.
There is no common case - the ABI is otherwise stable.
There is a common case of a lot of other libraries using subslots consistently. Developers really have better things to do than check every single library how it's using subslots in case it has a really special use for them.
None of that is relevant to this bug.
(In reply to Michał Górny from comment #3) > There is a common case of a lot of other libraries using subslots > consistently. Developers really have better things to do than check every > single library how it's using subslots in case it has a really special use > for them. Then we shouldn't use a subslot at all for Qt5. That would be the "common case" of Qt usage (i.e. using public APIs only). Personally I don't have a strong opinion either way. In any case please discuss in bug 554190
Qt team: how would you like me to proceed here? Remove the slot-operator or not?
Yes please remove it. The slot operator is wrong for this package regardless of the outcome of the discussion that is happening in bug 554190.
commit acc67f4952404f0aa0439e00edfd447f350860d3 Author: Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org> Date: Thu Dec 3 12:41:32 2015 -0500 net-p2p/transmission: Remove slot-operator from Qt deps Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/554248 Package-Manager: portage-2.2.26_p10 ...ission-2.84-r3.ebuild => transmission-2.84-r4.ebuild} | 16 ++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
