| 1 |
On Wednesday 15 June 2005 00:52, Marius Mauch wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 23:32:06 +0200 |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
> > I don't think gcc-config should depend on portage at all. Or does it |
| 6 |
> > actually use portage services. In any case it should be an RDEPEND, |
| 7 |
> > as building does not depend on portage being there. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Hmm, how do you build an ebuild without portage? Not trying to defend |
| 10 |
> that dependency, but technically all ebuilds DEPEND on portage (or a |
| 11 |
> compatible package manager), that's the most implicit dependency of |
| 12 |
> all. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
I think you know what I mean. By definition portage is allready there for |
| 15 |
the ebuild to be evaluated. It is therefore unnecessary to specify it as |
| 16 |
a dependency. Besides that for most packages any compatible package |
| 17 |
manager should work (there just is only portage now though). |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Paul |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
Paul de Vrieze |
| 23 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 24 |
Mail: pauldv@g.o |
| 25 |
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net |
Archives