| 1 |
On 08/31/2012 02:40 PM, Fabio Erculiani wrote: |
| 2 |
> I like this as well. |
| 3 |
> However, since we're going to introduce a *DEPEND split, how about |
| 4 |
> splitting PDEPEND as well? |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> As far as I've seen, PDEPEND has two (or more?) different meanings: |
| 7 |
> - advisory (for instance, informing users about plugins) |
| 8 |
> - cycle-breaking to help the dependency solver |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Would it be possible to add support for ODEPEND (as in "optional" |
| 11 |
> dependencies -- I don't really care about the variable name) as well? |
| 12 |
> This would be quite beneficial under certain circumstances. One of |
| 13 |
> these is when ebuilds are shipped with PDEPENDs which are not required |
| 14 |
> at runtime nor for cycle-breaking... |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> Another scenario in where ODEPEND would be nice to have is with |
| 17 |
> systemd init files pulled in by USE=systemd (and generally use? ( |
| 18 |
> sys-apps/systemd ) in *DEPEND). Providing full systemd support for all |
| 19 |
> the packages without forcing users to have it installed, given that |
| 20 |
> openrc is the de-facto standard init system in Gentoo (and we don't |
| 21 |
> have any openrc? ( sys-apps/openrc )), would be a nice features for |
| 22 |
> binpkg repos. Users could then choose to enable or disable ODEPEND |
| 23 |
> during dependencies calculation via make.conf or argv. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> I don't want to diverge too much from the HDEPEND discussion, but I |
| 26 |
> think that if we're going to split *DEPEND, it might be a good |
| 27 |
> opportunity to do it right _once_ and _for all_. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
For optional dependencies, I'm pretty happy with the "runtime-switchable |
| 30 |
USE flags" proposal: |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
https://gist.github.com/2945569 |
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
Thanks, |
| 35 |
Zac |
Archives