-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Randy McMurchy wrote: > Wayne Blaszczyk wrote these words on 01/19/10 07:58 CST: >> Randy, >> Most of my Recommend dependency choices are done based on a set of rules >> that I go by. That is, if an optional dependency that is not going to be >> used and requires an explicit optional switch to disable that >> dependency, then I put it as a recommend dependency. The reasoning >> behind this is that I feel that the developer wants you to used that >> dependency. > > This goes strictly against policies set by BLFS for years. BLFS disables > optional dependencies, and puts the --disable-whatever on the command > line. Only in extenuating circumstances have we varied from that policy. > Sorry, I didn't realize this was the policy. From now on I'll write up the command line with a minimalist build.
> >> The above example with gnome-mount is such a case where if >> nautilus is not installed, then the configure script will complain about >> it being missing unless the -disable-nautilus-extension option is specified. > > BLFS has policy that does it differently. BLFS does not care what the > developer thinks we should do, BLFS allows the user to make those > decisions. BLFS' job is to identify to the readers what the dependency > is used for (if it is not obvious). Then the readers chooses. > > >> Another reason why I would make something as recommended, is if that >> optional dependency is a requirement to an upstream package and that the >> package in question is only used by that upstream package. > > You'll have to rephrase that for me. I don't really understand what you > mean. :-( > If package A has a required dependency, package B and package B has a an optional dependency, package C, and package A requires package C to be present during package B build otherwise it breaks package A, and package B is not used for anything else but package A, then I don't see why package C cannot be bumped up to a recommended dependency for package B. I hope this makes it more understandable. Wayne. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFLVs+BhfgHoRhX2wIRAm9UAKCl65k5VKwixFQnMBBA8CwxcNZsLwCdEdnZ sgLd6r6tPQnKBbJJWx39bBM= =hyYj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-book FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
