Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Alin Nastac <mrness@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC about another *DEPEND variable
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 17:18:48
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC about another *DEPEND variable by Brian Harring
Brian Harring wrote:
> BDEPEND was actually a seperate proposal/idea, intention there was to > have that be the deps that *must* be CHOST (gcc would be an example); > bits that are used to actually build the pkg, not data it consumes in > building (headers would be data). >
Well, until now I didn't thought at the build compatibility. My concern was only the runtime compatibility.
> Meanwhile, for this I don't see the point in using a seperate metadata > key. Overload DEPEND and add a marker char that is used to indicate > that a particular dependency is 'binding', ie, it is linkage. >
Lets suppose we use & as 'binding' dependency marker. What sense would DEPEND="&net-dialup/ppp" have in a context of an ebuild. It certainly don't specify the necessity of package rebuild whenever net-dialup/ppp version is changed. Unless you save the specific compatibility version of the net-dialup/ppp used by net-dialup/pptpd for building the package, I don't see how can it help me. Judging after /var/db/pkg content, I have no such information.


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


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC about another *DEPEND variable Brian Harring <ferringb@×××××.com>
Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC about another *DEPEND variable Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o>