| 1 |
On Wed, 15 Aug 2012 06:27:41 -0400 |
| 2 |
Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> 1. Devs don't want to have ebuilds that capture dependencies on every |
| 5 |
> little thing. A few well-chosen virtuals like "shell utilities" or |
| 6 |
> whatever might help with this. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Just note that PMS specifies a few requirements about those utilities |
| 9 |
as well. I'm not sure if we want ebuilds explicitly DEPEND-ing on |
| 10 |
things which are required by PMS. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
In any case, virtual/posix-system would be nice to have. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
> 2. Things like Prefix rely on the system not installing local copies |
| 15 |
> of libraries in the core system it needs to link to. Careful use of |
| 16 |
> package.provided in profiles might address this. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
We could also make virtuals not pull in anything on Prefix in those |
| 19 |
cases. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
> 3. We'd need many more virtuals to handle situations like FreeBSD |
| 22 |
> where people don't what GNU on their systems. Right now if they are |
| 23 |
> system packages they just define system appropriately and ebuilds |
| 24 |
> don't directly pull in the GNU stuff anyway. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
I doubt that's a problem. We've got a lot of virtuals and adding new |
| 27 |
ones shouldn't be a problem. I'd dare say it's better to add more |
| 28 |
virtuals than introducing USEflags to existing ones -- it requires less |
| 29 |
work from users. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
Best regards, |
| 33 |
Michał Górny |
Archives