On Saturday 19 November 2005 01:13, Michael Cummings wrote:
> Jason Stubbs wrote:
> > "Resolved - Fixed"?
> Hmmm, might have been aq epiphany quirk (wouldn't be the first) - when i
> looked there was no comment indicated.
Nope. I wrote ".". Bugs wrote the above for me. ;)
> > The last discussion that was had ended up with a TDEPEND, but that
> > doesn't cover the additional SRC_URI requirements. Besides SRC_URI, are
> > there any other requirements that might sneak in later on?
> and this is the other reason i took it off -dev - so i don't sound like
> an idiot -there's a TPDEPEND now?? That would 100% cover my needs, since
> these are testing depends.
A TDEPEND? Nope, not yet. It's just a possible solution that won't require
overloading USE flags for internal purposes further.
> > Nah, let's get it in the open (again) and get it dealt with.
> OK, so i violated that, but now i'm wondering if my needs are already
> covered (hey, could happen) :)
Not just yet...
email@example.com mailing list