Am 17. September 2017 15:55:37 MESZ schrieb Levente Polyak <[email protected]>: >On September 17, 2017 3:44:26 PM GMT+02:00, Lex Black ><[email protected]> wrote: >>Am 17. September 2017 15:07:48 MESZ schrieb Morten Linderud >><[email protected]>: >>>On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 07:48:24AM -0400, Daniel Capella via >>>aur-general wrote: >>>> Input: https://ptpb.pw/7YEJ >>>> Output: https://ptpb.pw/-L5i >>>> >>> >>>Missing "python" in the depends array. >> >>Any specific reason? >>It is indirectly covered through the dependencies. > >Because technically it's a very direct first level dependency. It's >quite unlikely that a first level python lib dependency will ever not >depend on python itself, however it is a quite bad trend to remove any >first level dependency just because another one covers it on the second >level. >For c libs it is also easier to fetch things that need a rebuild rather >then grepping for sonames that are linked against it. >Either way, all first level dependencies should always be defined, >personally I call anything else a bad practice. >Of course one could easily fix a missing first level dependency when >another lib drops it, however that's not the point, it still remains >technically incorrect. > >Cheers, >Levente
Some valid points. Thank you for the explanation. I will keep it in mind for future updates of my packages.
