| 1 |
On Wednesday 16 May 2007 16:54:13 Neil Bothwick wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wed, 16 May 2007 16:23:13 +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Thank you for producing lots of circular dependencies |
| 4 |
> > (ie. in the Xserver), which make maintenance complicated. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Lots? If you'd posted this yesterday, I would[n't] have been able to recall |
| 7 |
> the last time I was hit with one. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> > Great, great thanks to the devs for forcing me to maintain my |
| 10 |
> > own overlay to clean up the crap. (anyone who's interested in |
| 11 |
> > it, please give a note). |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> I did get a circular dependency today, sdl and directfb and guess what? |
| 14 |
> The error message also contained the solution, which was to temporarily |
| 15 |
> change a USE flag. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Circular dependencies are mostly a problem for new users since as soon as the |
| 18 |
dependencies are installed the circular dependencies are satisfied and hence |
| 19 |
irrelevant. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
The real problem comes when a new user right after finishing install sets a |
| 22 |
bunch of use flags and attempts to emerge gnome or kde only to be greeted |
| 23 |
with 40 lines or more of circular dependencies. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Enrico's 'brilliant' solution is to split packages like Debian (which again |
| 26 |
makes me wonder why he doesn't just switch back to that). The route the |
| 27 |
Gentoo devs are going to take, however, is to improve portage which |
| 28 |
unfortunately tends to drag on... For the impatient this is one of things |
| 29 |
that paludis does a lot better than portage. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
For the general case I fully agree with the rest of your post. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
Bo Andresen |
Archives