Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Jason Stubbs <jstubbs@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Bugzilla Bug 79337 make repoman complain if DEPEND and RDEPEND are not set.
Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2005 14:25:15
Message-Id: 200506012325.02543.jstubbs@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Bugzilla Bug 79337 make repoman complain if DEPEND and RDEPEND are not set. by Mike Frysinger
1 On Tuesday 31 May 2005 09:55, Mike Frysinger wrote:
2 > On Monday 30 May 2005 08:51 pm, Brian Harring wrote:
3 > > On Sun, May 29, 2005 at 02:32:45AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
4 > > > On Sunday 29 May 2005 01:48 am, Alec Warner wrote:
5 > > > > The actual fix to the bug is a minor one, a small check to Repoman to
6 > > > > make sure ebuilds have both DEPEND and RDEPEND set; and to warn if
7 > > > > they are not set.
8 > > > >
9 > > > > However the use of DEPEND and RDEPEND in the manner that they are
10 > > > > requesting is a large change and thus was brought here for
11 > > > > discussion.
12 > > >
13 > > > i'm against this ... the current behavior is the logical default imho
14 > >
15 > > What of eclasses? Bug 58819 comes to mind...
16 >
17 > i'd be for 'fixing' the eclass behavior ... making it work the same way as
18 > ebuilds
19
20 I'd be for having DEPEND required to be set manually. ;)
21
22 But seeing that it would be a huge task and there aren't the resources or
23 support to do it at this time, and as I feel standards (even when they're
24 wrong :P ) are most important of all, I'd agree to making RDEPEND default to
25 DEPEND for eclasses too.
26
27 Perhaps, further down the track we'd be able to work out something with the
28 build farm thingy; check for linkage and warn if things specified in RDEPEND
29 aren't linked against and build up a whitelist from it... Perhaps repoman
30 will become smart enough to detect exactly which RDEPENDs are being defaulted
31 to what and where and then provide a warning and a resolution...
32
33 Anyway, not much point in increasing an already overflowing workload at this
34 point in time.
35
36 Regards,
37 Jason Stubbs

Replies