| 1 |
begin quote |
| 2 |
On Sat, 27 Dec 2003 20:22:53 -0500 |
| 3 |
Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
> On Saturday 27 December 2003 19:24, Spider wrote: |
| 6 |
> > Oh yes! even more. |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> > Can people who feel like it take a look for all builds that contain |
| 9 |
> > the |
| 10 |
> > word "newdepend" and think at least twice? remember.. newdepend |
| 11 |
> > means that RDEPEND won't be set (unless you do newrdepend) which |
| 12 |
> > means that the package will be broken in GRP situations. |
| 13 |
> > |
| 14 |
> > (Yep, its a known fact that all of KDE is broken and unless fixed |
| 15 |
> > cannot be reliably distributed on our next release.) |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> the newXdepend's should only be used in eclasses |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Even worse, there are ~300 ebuilds in the tree that uses them. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
//Spider |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
begin .signature |
| 27 |
This is a .signature virus! Please copy me into your .signature! |
| 28 |
See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information. |
| 29 |
end |
Archives