1 |
Luca Barbato wrote: |
2 |
|
3 |
> Some items I have in wishlist |
4 |
> |
5 |
> - LRDEPEND link runtime dep (I need to link against that in order to run) |
6 |
|
7 |
I heartily concur with a link dependency, since it's such a fundamental |
8 |
relationship between packages: if A links to B we need to recompile A when |
9 |
the ABI for B changes. How useful is the distinction between runtime vs |
10 |
buildtime in that respect? (I can't see the point of linking to something |
11 |
if it's never used at runtime.) |
12 |
|
13 |
> - BDEPEND build dep (I need those tools in order to build) |
14 |
> |
15 |
Agreed. I'd hope LDEPEND and BDEPEND could cover all current DEPEND uses. |
16 |
Either you depend on something to be installed as you link to its headers |
17 |
and use it at runtime, or you need the tool to build, eg make. (RDEPENDs |
18 |
with no linkage, and hence no requirement to be installed at build-time, |
19 |
and PDEPENDs to break circular chains are the ones I know about.) But I |
20 |
don't know how that interacts with || DEPENDs. |
21 |
|
22 |
wrt SUGGEST et al, I don't see why those can't be kept separately in |
23 |
metadata.xml, if labelling isn't implemented, since they're only of use for |
24 |
package selection, not depgraph resolution (as I understand it). |
25 |
|
26 |
> - arch/ctarget support in deps (same way you have use deps) |
27 |
> |
28 |
Interesting idea. |
29 |
|
30 |
> - explicit ctarget support in the package manager emerge --cross=target |
31 |
> something. |
32 |
> |
33 |
Definitely, at least as much as we can do with the standard variables and |
34 |
GNU make. So not everything will cross-compile, that's to be expected. It |
35 |
would be cool to tie that into the tinderbox stuff that solar and |
36 |
bonsaikitten have done, so that testing could be automated. |
37 |
|
38 |
> - tools to explicitly manipulate sets |
39 |
> |
40 |
I must be missing something with these: they just seem like lists of |
41 |
packages (which you might want updated together, or compiled with the same |
42 |
set of flags etc.) That kind of stuff is more to do with scripting afaict, |
43 |
than the core package manager. (eg using predefined files for any and all |
44 |
configuration before compiling, and then resetting once the set is built. |
45 |
Recovery issues aren't so bad if the user knows the machine has crashed and |
46 |
runs the program to reset stuff before anything else is emerged.) |
47 |
|
48 |
> long time ideas: |
49 |
> |
50 |
> - support cross, multiarch, multilib in a saner and seamless way |
51 |
> |
52 |
Yeah, even if it means building everything in a chroot, for development libs |
53 |
at least. http://tldp.org/HOWTO/Multi-Distro-Dev/use.html (old) reminds me |
54 |
of this; I found it the other day and it looked a lot like stuff we do in |
55 |
Gentoo chroots. |
56 |
|
57 |
|
58 |
-- |
59 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |