Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@×××××××××××××.uk>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in net-print/cups: ChangeLog cups-1.3.4-r1.ebuild cups-1.3.4.ebuild
Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2007 10:31:46
Message-Id: 20071109102849.1fed7114@blueyonder.co.uk
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in net-print/cups: ChangeLog cups-1.3.4-r1.ebuild cups-1.3.4.ebuild by Donnie Berkholz
1 On Fri, 9 Nov 2007 00:13:39 -0800
2 Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@g.o> wrote:
3 > > PDEPEND="
4 > > ppds? ( || (
5 > > (
6 > > net-print/foomatic-filters-ppds
7 > > net-print/foomatic-db-ppds
8 > > )
9 > > net-print/foomatic-filters-ppds
10 > > net-print/foomatic-db-ppds
11 > > net-print/hplip
12 > > media-gfx/gimp-print
13 > > net-print/foo2zjs
14 > > net-print/cups-pdf
15 > > ) )
16 >
17 > I'm not sure I understand this dep. Either these two packages, or
18 > these two packages and a lot more? When would the second one ever
19 > happen?
20
21 Looks like it's a silly hack that relies upon the resolver taking the
22 first available option if nothing's installed. So if the user already
23 has any one of the listed packages, it does nothing, otherwise it
24 installs the two in their own block.
25
26 Which is rather perverse, and doesn't have the desired effect anyway,
27 since one of the listed options could well be pulled in as an earlier
28 dep anyway, in which case the pair wouldn't be chosen even if the user
29 previously had none of those packages.
30
31 --
32 Ciaran McCreesh

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies