| 1 |
On 5/16/07, Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@×××××.de> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> Which problem from the upstream ? |
| 4 |
> I'm a little bit involved in Xorg development (especially on the |
| 5 |
> modularizing project), so if you tell me the problem, I could fix it. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> The problem w/ x11-base/xorg-server are the PDEPENDs on (external) |
| 8 |
> driver packages. I dont see any valid reason for depending the |
| 9 |
> Xserver on drivers, which themselfes depend on the Xserver. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> If you want some package which pulls in an complete Xserver installation |
| 12 |
> *and* drivers (based on certain useflags), why not just an virtual |
| 13 |
> package ? |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> IMHO, there were days where it had been done so (when PDEPEND did not |
| 16 |
> yet exist). I don't know why this had changed, probably just to get |
| 17 |
> an new feature widely used. (BTW: I do not see any valid reason for |
| 18 |
> PDEPEND anyways) |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Thanks, this was much more informative and useful than: |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
> I also want to say "Thank you" to the gentoo devs. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> Thank you for producing lots of circular dependencies |
| 26 |
> (ie. in the Xserver), which make maintenance complicated. |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> Cirular deps have been really sucking in SuSE and were one |
| 29 |
> of the major for dropping it to me. |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> Great, great thanks to the devs for forcing me to maintain my |
| 32 |
> own overlay to clean up the crap. (anyone who's interested in |
| 33 |
> it, please give a note). |
Archives