| 1 |
Donnie Berkholz wrote: [Mon Oct 24 2005, 11:37:03PM CDT] |
| 2 |
> Now, the other side of the story. It's not true runtime dependence |
| 3 |
> because it's not required for programs to run, only to compile. And the |
| 4 |
> way I see it, things required for programs to compile are by definition |
| 5 |
> DEPEND rather than RDEPEND. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
I think I'm w/ spider on this one. At the risk of initiating a semantic |
| 8 |
scuffle, my view is that the DEPEND and RDEPEND variables exist solely |
| 9 |
to tell portage what packages are needed for portage to produce a |
| 10 |
fully-functional package. A library w/ missing header dependencies is |
| 11 |
clearly not fully-functional, so portage needs to include that |
| 12 |
dependency even if it is a binary package that is being installed. The |
| 13 |
way to do that is to include the dependency in RDEPEND, even if the name |
| 14 |
seems to be not quite appropriate. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
> The consequences of the two sides are like this, from what I can see: |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> 1) Headers are run-time and build-time deps |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> - - Headers have to be installed even when you're using purely binary |
| 21 |
> packages, because they are supposedly needed at "runtime" for your |
| 22 |
> packages to work. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> - - Also, header packages can't be uninstalled after the build via |
| 25 |
> depclean because they're specified as run-time dependencies. |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> 2) Headers are build-time deps only |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> - - Binary packages don't require the header packages. |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> - - Header packages can be unmerged after builds. |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
> - - Packages requiring the headers have to DEPEND on them directly, |
| 34 |
> because DEPENDs don't cascade. (Although this brings to mind the concept |
| 35 |
> of some sort of cascadable DEPEND.) |
| 36 |
> |
| 37 |
> |
| 38 |
> I'd like to hear what some other people think about this. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
I've always been a big fan of the fact that by default we install |
| 41 |
fully-capable packages that include headers, because it makes Gentoo |
| 42 |
much more appealing to developers. My group is working on some |
| 43 |
cryo-microscopy software that incorporates quite a number of scientific |
| 44 |
and graphical libraries, and setting up Ubuntu or Debian for one of our |
| 45 |
project developers was a pain as I struggled to ensure that I had all of |
| 46 |
the necessary development packages installed. |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
At the same time, I'm suppose that including header files by default is |
| 49 |
not such a good thing for the embedded folks. |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
-g2boojum- |
| 52 |
-- |
| 53 |
Grant Goodyear |
| 54 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 55 |
g2boojum@g.o |
| 56 |
http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum |
| 57 |
GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0 9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76 |
Archives