Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Thomas de Grenier de Latour <degrenier@×××××××××××.fr>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] (U)DEPEND: thoughts?
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 18:18:21
Message-Id: 20040112185159.35695173@wallace
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] (U)DEPEND: thoughts? by Pieter Van den Abeele
1 On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 17:51:59 +0100
2 Pieter Van den Abeele <pvdabeel@g.o> wrote:
3
4 > A rdep B cdep C
5 > D cdep A
6
7 Yes, you're right, it has no benefit in this case. I have no idea if
8 such "cdep,rdep*,cdep" paths are numerous or not in the global deps
9 graph tho, but the more I think of it, the less I have arguments to say
10 they are not. So forget it, and as you said, there are better approach
11 to QA. The good news is that it is one less thing to do in portage-ng,
12 thus I've not been conterproductive :)
13
14
15 --
16 TGL.
17
18 --
19 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list