| 1 |
On Wednesday 18 January 2012 12:32:08 Paweł Hajdan, Jr. wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 1/18/12 4:48 PM, Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On 10:05 Wed 18 Jan , Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 4 |
> >> On Wednesday 18 January 2012 09:23:00 Agostino Sarubbo wrote: |
| 5 |
> >>> 3) Check your rdepend, where is possible with scanelf[3] and if you |
| 6 |
> >>> declare it, please, as you said, exclude gcc/glibc and all package |
| 7 |
> >>> from @system |
| 8 |
> >> |
| 9 |
> >> portage generates a NEEDED file in the vdb |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> > Awesome, never seen that before! |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> Same here. How about adding some warning to portage (maybe just in the |
| 14 |
> developer profile) when files in NEEDED are provided by packages not in |
| 15 |
> RDEPEND? |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
atm, we'll get a lot of false positives due to over-linking. the libtool + |
| 18 |
.la files "issue" is a general example. another one off the top of my head: a |
| 19 |
package uses GTK+, so it runs `pkg-config --libs gtk+-2.0`, and links against a |
| 20 |
lot more stuff than GTK+, but it doesn't list those deps itself, so it'd fail. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
we could extend the logic to assume anything not found in the pkg's RDEPEND, |
| 23 |
but was found in the full RDEPEND tree, is simply an implicit dep like that, |
| 24 |
but this quickly dilutes the usefulness i think :(. |
| 25 |
-mike |
Archives