| 1 |
On 11/13/14 21:38, Michael Palimaka wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 14/11/14 11:06, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Michael Palimaka |
| 4 |
>> <kensington@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
>>> Ditching implicit dependencies is an interesting idea but not practical. |
| 6 |
>>> Nobody wants to the laundry list, and there's little benefit in |
| 7 |
>>> maintaining a virtual/system clone of @system. |
| 8 |
>>> |
| 9 |
>> Well, the idea would be to maintain the virtual INSTEAD of @system, or |
| 10 |
>> have @system just pull in the virtual and make some arch-specific |
| 11 |
>> additions. |
| 12 |
> Will that work? Some profiles remove packages from the base @system and |
| 13 |
> replace it with their own implementations (eg. BSD). |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Naively implemented, this would break my uclibc and musl builds which do |
| 16 |
exactly that. However, you could build in logic, like `if use |
| 17 |
elibc_uclibc; then`, or DEPEND="elibc_uclibc? ( ... )" etc. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
I get the benefits of this approach, but I'm happy enough with the |
| 20 |
status quo that I'm not in favor of the extra work. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
-- |
| 23 |
Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D. |
| 24 |
Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened] |
| 25 |
E-Mail : blueness@g.o |
| 26 |
GnuPG FP : 1FED FAD9 D82C 52A5 3BAB DC79 9384 FA6E F52D 4BBA |
| 27 |
GnuPG ID : F52D4BBA |
Archives