On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 08:15:48PM +0300, Alin Nastac wrote:
> Brian Harring wrote:
> > BDEPEND was actually a seperate proposal/idea, intention there was to 
> > have that be the deps that *must* be CHOST (gcc would be an example); 
> > bits that are used to actually build the pkg, not data it consumes in 
> > building (headers would be data).
> >   
> Well, until now I didn't thought at the build compatibility.
> My concern was only the runtime compatibility.
> > Meanwhile, for this I don't see the point in using a seperate metadata 
> > key.  Overload DEPEND and add a marker char that is used to indicate 
> > that a particular dependency is 'binding', ie, it is linkage.
> >   
> Lets suppose we use & as 'binding' dependency marker. What sense would
> DEPEND="&net-dialup/ppp" have in a context of an ebuild. It certainly
> don't specify the necessity of package rebuild whenever net-dialup/ppp
> version is changed.
>
> Unless you save the specific compatibility version of the net-dialup/ppp
> used by net-dialup/pptpd for building the package, I don't see how can
> it help me.
> Judging after /var/db/pkg content, I have no such information.

Any such implementation would require storing some extra data in the 
vdb....

For this, would just walk the *DEPEND collecting 'binding' 
dependencies, and storing their BINCOMPAT in a simple mapping.

~harring