>>>>> On Mon, 15 Aug 2011, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:

> On Mon, 15 Aug 2011 08:12:55 +0200
> Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote:
>> I'd still suggest that for existing EAPIs we should go with
>> mgorny's latest patch, simply because "packages common to DEPEND
>> and RDEPEND (but see below)" is a more accurate description than
>> "none".

> But if we do that, people will claim it's the package mangler's
> fault if packages common to DEPEND and RDEPEND aren't available.
> You're asking for something unimplementable to be specified.

No, they can't claim that, because we explicitly say that there are
restrictions in case of circular dependencies.

Ulrich