| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On Mon May 26 2003 2:49 pm, George Shapovalov wrote: |
| 5 |
> Ok, getting back to topic: |
| 6 |
> DEPEND is a required field in ebuild (RDEPEND though may be omitted, in |
| 7 |
> which case it is filled in from DEPEND). As such it makes sense to put |
| 8 |
> some absolutely something basic in DEPEND for the package which does not |
| 9 |
> have any apparent (as non-trivial, not bad-researched) dependencies. In |
| 10 |
> that respect virtual/glibc perfectly fits the bill... |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
The fact that this virtual was named "glibc" from the beginning was |
| 13 |
probably a mistake. It should have been named "libc". |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
It is conceivable, if not desireable, that we may have more than one libc |
| 16 |
available to users -- alternatives to glibc. Whether that's newlib, or a |
| 17 |
*BSD libc, or some other libc ... others exist and just haven't been |
| 18 |
integrated into the tree yet. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Even though I _eventually_ anticipate "virtual/glibc" being changed to |
| 21 |
"virtual/libc" -- I can't see this virtual being particularly useful from |
| 22 |
an ebuild perspective. Instead we would see new USE flags for each |
| 23 |
different libc to handle compatibility issues. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Cheers, |
| 26 |
Dylan Carlson [absinthe@g.o] |
| 27 |
Developer, Java Lead -- Gentoo Linux |
| 28 |
Public Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x708E165F |
| 29 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 30 |
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
iD8DBQE+0mWGPQS8wXCOFl8RAsIaAJ4pBRuS8z8qljtqAiAJKY4Ke032vwCfdkJ/ |
| 33 |
MlKDQXMwSJEuxEHXVcu90O4= |
| 34 |
=0tYF |
| 35 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
-- |
| 39 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives