| 1 |
On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 12:10:20PM +0200, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote: |
| 2 |
> jumping on the train here, but who said PM would not feed proper data to |
| 3 |
> pkg_pretend so it would behave like the DEPEND were already built. Could |
| 4 |
> some guy involved in a PM development tell us about how this would be |
| 5 |
> handled ? |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
Good idea, but not really viable. The only scenario where this would |
| 8 |
work cleanly is in has_version checks which most of the time should be |
| 9 |
blockers/deps anyways. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Basically, you want the PM to lie to the ebuild in some fashion. |
| 12 |
Since pkg_pretend is free form, it's effectively impossible to cover |
| 13 |
the scenarios it could check on- consider checking the kernel |
| 14 |
config/version, or checking the active jvm/python version. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Some of those can sort of be handled, but it requires a lot of custom |
| 17 |
code (code that has to change as the tools involved change) to pull it |
| 18 |
off. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
As said, good idea, but it was ruled out due to it being techically |
| 21 |
infeasible considering the gains. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
~harring |
Archives