| 1 |
On Sat, 2008-04-19 at 06:33 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 22:27:21 -0700 |
| 3 |
> Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> > My interpretation is pkg_* counts as runtime (I can imagine a package |
| 5 |
> > wanting to run itself at this point), so packages in RDEPEND should |
| 6 |
> > be usable at that point. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Which would be fine, except it makes the tree unusable. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> > Really, it seems to be an additional type of dependency that neither |
| 11 |
> > DEPEND or RDEPEND fully describe, and this DEPEND+RDEPEND idea isn't |
| 12 |
> > quite capturing it either. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Yup, and for future EAPIs labels can fix this. But we have to have a |
| 15 |
> sound solution for current EAPIs. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
I would agree that RDEPEND should likely be installed prior to |
| 18 |
pkg_preinst to satisfy the dependency. After all, PDEPEND is "good |
| 19 |
enough" for doing packages that aren't required at |
| 20 |
pkg_preinst/pkg_postinst. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
We definitely don't want to install DEPEND at the pkg_* stages, so I'd |
| 23 |
say the requirement there, if you're asking, is prior to src_*, if that |
| 24 |
matters. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
I'd love to have some kind of functionality to allow some kind of |
| 27 |
"optional" dependencies. The only real way that I could see this |
| 28 |
working is if we tracked what was installed as an optional dependency, |
| 29 |
and not reinstall it if it has been removed the next time the depending |
| 30 |
package is merged. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Simple example: |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
ODEPEND="video_cards_nvidia? ( x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers)" would |
| 35 |
install x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers the first time it's ran with |
| 36 |
VIDEO_CARDS="nvidia", but if I removed x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers, it |
| 37 |
wouldn't get reinstalled. This would probably need some kind of |
| 38 |
"--newuse" like capability to allow for installing only *new* optional |
| 39 |
dependencies, but I think that the tracking would already allow that. |
| 40 |
The idea here would be to allow for installing "recommended" software |
| 41 |
along with others. We could even have --ask ask for the dependencies, |
| 42 |
since they are optional, after all. |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
This way, we could "ship" a more robust configuration/setup for many |
| 45 |
popular applications without forcing software on people. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
It's an idea, anyway, and I hope that I didn't hijack the thread. |
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
-- |
| 50 |
Chris Gianelloni |
| 51 |
Release Engineering Strategic Lead |
| 52 |
Games Developer |
Archives