| 1 |
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 12:32 AM, Matt Turner <mattst88@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Often packages depending on X11 libraries will also have to specify |
| 3 |
> the X11 libraries' proto packages in DEPEND. This is because the X11 |
| 4 |
> library itself #includes files provided by the proto package. It's not |
| 5 |
> really that the X11 library depends on this at run-time, so the |
| 6 |
> protocol packages aren't specified in the RDEPEND of the libraries. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> This is documented in a number of bug reports (see 379545), and it |
| 9 |
> seems that the decision is between |
| 10 |
> - add proto package to dependency list of packages using X11 libs |
| 11 |
> - add proto package to rdepend list of the relevant library itself |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> The first is more correct, I think, but it's also much more annoying. |
| 14 |
> Mesa winds up having x11-proto/inputproto in DEPEND for some long |
| 15 |
> forgotten reason, for instance. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> The second option is much simpler and less error prone, but removes |
| 18 |
> the ability to depclean the proto packages. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> It seems that some sort of DEPEND variable that means "I only need |
| 21 |
> this when other packages are building against me" would be useful. |
| 22 |
> Thoughts? |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> Matt |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Another similar situation: |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=342393 |
Archives