| 1 |
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 9:35 PM, Sven Vermeulen <swift@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> [...] |
| 3 |
> The dependency must be on both levels, because the SELinux module must be |
| 4 |
> installed before the package is installed (and in theory, RDEPEND could |
| 5 |
> trigger an installation afterwards): during the installation phase, Portage |
| 6 |
> labels the files on the system (which would get wrong labels if the module |
| 7 |
> isn't installed yet[1]). Also, DEPEND isn't sufficient due to binary package |
| 8 |
> support requirements. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> Wkr, |
| 12 |
> Sven Vermeulen |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> [1] I am aware that Portage currently installs RDEPEND before the package |
| 15 |
> itself, but that might change in the future and other package managers might |
| 16 |
> exhibit different behavior. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
I haven't really understood what you mean with RDEPENDs being scheduled "after". |
| 20 |
RDEPEND must be always scheduled before the pkg requiring it, changing |
| 21 |
this behaviour would have disruptive effects on all the PMS out there |
| 22 |
(OTOH I think I haven't gotten the point actually?). I guess portage |
| 23 |
may schedule it in arbitrary order if the RDEPEND dep itself is |
| 24 |
satisfied already (this would mean that you explicitly pulled it in), |
| 25 |
and this is the only case I can think of. |
| 26 |
If you need to schedule a dep install at some point, you should rather |
| 27 |
use PDEPEND, but if the same is required earlier in the schedule, |
| 28 |
well, you're flooked. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
Fabio Erculiani |
| 32 |
http://lxnay.com |
Archives