| 1 |
On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 08:35:36PM +0200, Maurice van der Pot wrote: |
| 2 |
> If the point is to make dependencies complete, isn't there a way to |
| 3 |
> build in some support for detecting it into some tool or other? |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> If we have a program that can create an environment and detect which |
| 6 |
> programs are run within the environment (maybe sandbox can do this, |
| 7 |
> maybe something with LD_PRELOAD, I'm sure we can think of something), |
| 8 |
> then we can build a list of programs that are run during the build. |
| 9 |
> If we have such a list, we can find out which packages are required |
| 10 |
> to provide the tools in the list. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Such a tool could be used to generate the correct build dependencies |
| 13 |
> automatically or verify the existing bdeps. |
| 14 |
Not tenuable |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
What you're effectivelly suggesting is that portage stomp ahead and, |
| 17 |
hit a failure, try and figure out what atom would fix the failure, |
| 18 |
retry, wash rinse repeat. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Short version is that what you're proposing is basically a set of |
| 21 |
tricks portage knows about to deal with failures; the problem is that |
| 22 |
these failures can manifest themselves in a lot of crazy ways. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Aside from that, LD_PRELOAD style hacks aren't exactly easy to do on |
| 25 |
osx (got a dyld equiv, but have yet to see anyone do a sandbox equiv |
| 26 |
via it). |
| 27 |
~harring |
Archives