| 1 |
On Saturday 24 February 2007 12:34, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 12:27:35 +0900 Jason Stubbs <jstubbs@g.o> |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> wrote: |
| 5 |
> | For the 14 cases you mentioned that were making a mistake, they |
| 6 |
> | probably can be rewritten so as to force an install of the first |
| 7 |
> | matching package, but when that isn't what is wanted it becomes a bit |
| 8 |
> | of a headache. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> That should *always* be what's wanted. Packages should only alter |
| 11 |
> dependencies / build parameters based upon USE flags, not based upon |
| 12 |
> what else happens to be installed. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Okay, I must be missing something here. If package foo can work with either |
| 15 |
bar or baz equily as well but not both, why should it force an artificial |
| 16 |
preference? Also, if packages should not specify dependencies based on |
| 17 |
what is installed, the semantics of || ( ) would need to be changed such |
| 18 |
that the first non-masked packages is always installed. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
The only reason I can see for the above is to be able to have non-broken |
| 21 |
binary packages. However, that can be addressed by replacing *DEPEND in |
| 22 |
binary packages with their resolved forms. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
Jason Stubbs |
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives