| 1 |
Hey all, I have a question. I was informed that bind-8.2.3 package was |
| 2 |
failing to emerge due to being masked. On further investigation of that I |
| 3 |
discovered that it's not masked and only noticed the following things. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
DEPEND="virtual/glibc sys-apps/groff sys-devel/flex" |
| 6 |
RDEPEND="virtual/glibc" |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
I removed the RDEPEND cause it seems redundant, and it's not like glibc |
| 9 |
will ever not be installed anyway. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
I then changed the depend line to |
| 12 |
DEPEND="virtual/glibc |
| 13 |
>=sys-apps/groff-1.16.1 |
| 14 |
>=sys-devel/flex-2.5.4" |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
My question is, is the way it was correct? Can we do that (sys-apps/groff) |
| 17 |
notation for non-virtual DEPENDS? I woulnd't advise it anyway as I'd think |
| 18 |
it best if we only allow packages to emerge against DEPENDS that we know to |
| 19 |
work. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
-- |
| 23 |
Ben Lutgens |
| 24 |
Sistina Software Inc. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
"In the war against terrorism, there are no rear lines. We're all on the |
| 27 |
front lines" - William Cohen |
Archives