On Mon, 2005-10-17 at 10:04 -0500, Randy McMurchy wrote: > Jürg Billeter wrote these words on 10/17/05 08:35 CST: > > > gtk+-2.x explicitly checks for at least glib-2.0, atk, pango and cairo. > > And IMO these should all be added explicitly as required deps to the > > BLFS page as "hidden dependencies" can be nasty, especially when > > dependencies of dependencies change... > > 1. Policy is that we don't list dependencies that are already > required by other dependencies. Can you say redundancy?
Ok, didn't know what the policy is. > > 2. Going through and adding "hidden dependencies" would mean > adding probably hundreds of needless dependencies to the book. Yes, sure and hence it's probably sensible to not add these dependencies to BLFS. The reason I prefer having all direct dependencies explicitly listed is that it's more accurate and it may make some version upgrades easier. You wouldn't have to keep these "hidden dependencies" in mind when dependencies change with the package version, as you might need to add one of the "hidden dependencies" to another package, i.e. one you're not currently upgrading. This can happen if a "hidden dependency" doesn't get included anymore indirectly. But it's of course understandable that you want to limit the dependency lists. Jürg -- Jürg Billeter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
