| 1 |
On 25/10/16 11:34 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 25/10/16 11:05 AM, Nick Vinson wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On 10/25/2016 07:11 AM, Raymond Jennings wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> Don't you need autoconf and automake to build a lot of packages? |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>> Theoretically no. When autotools is used correctly, the release tarball |
| 7 |
>> has no dependency on either. That said, many people don't generate / |
| 8 |
>> distribute a release tarball. |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> However, I don't think this is the criterion used to determine what |
| 11 |
>> should be in @system. The wiki defines the system set as the set that |
| 12 |
>> "contains the software packages required for a standard Gentoo Linux |
| 13 |
>> installation to run properly". |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
>> That definition definitely excludes automake and autoconf (arguably gcc |
| 16 |
>> should also excluded, under that definition, so the wiki might not be |
| 17 |
>> 100% correct). |
| 18 |
>> |
| 19 |
>> -Nicholas Vinson |
| 20 |
>> |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> Unless you need to patch the build system, in which case you need to |
| 23 |
> re-run autoconf/automake/etc (usually via 'eautoreconf'). And there's |
| 24 |
> -plenty- of instances of that around as well. |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
I forgot to mention that autotools.eclass brings in these dependencies |
| 28 |
as-needed, though, so I agree that they definitely are not required in |
| 29 |
the @system set. |
Archives