| 1 |
Brian Harring wrote: |
| 2 |
> BDEPEND was actually a seperate proposal/idea, intention there was to |
| 3 |
> have that be the deps that *must* be CHOST (gcc would be an example); |
| 4 |
> bits that are used to actually build the pkg, not data it consumes in |
| 5 |
> building (headers would be data). |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
Well, until now I didn't thought at the build compatibility. |
| 8 |
My concern was only the runtime compatibility. |
| 9 |
> Meanwhile, for this I don't see the point in using a seperate metadata |
| 10 |
> key. Overload DEPEND and add a marker char that is used to indicate |
| 11 |
> that a particular dependency is 'binding', ie, it is linkage. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
Lets suppose we use & as 'binding' dependency marker. What sense would |
| 14 |
DEPEND="&net-dialup/ppp" have in a context of an ebuild. It certainly |
| 15 |
don't specify the necessity of package rebuild whenever net-dialup/ppp |
| 16 |
version is changed. |
| 17 |
Unless you save the specific compatibility version of the net-dialup/ppp |
| 18 |
used by net-dialup/pptpd for building the package, I don't see how can |
| 19 |
it help me. |
| 20 |
Judging after /var/db/pkg content, I have no such information. |
Archives