On Fri, Aug 03, 2007 at 09:44:56PM +0200, Michael Nottebrock wrote: > On Friday, 3. August 2007, Henrik Brix Andersen wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 06:17:15PM +0200, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > > > Quoting Henrik Brix Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (from Thu, 2 Aug > > > 2007 > > > > > > 16:17:10 +0200): > > >>> Feature: > > >>> - allow to only register explicit dependencies, disabled by default > > >>> (EXPLICIT_PACKAGE_DEPENDS=whatever_you_want) > > >> > > >> Can you elaborate a bit on this new EXPLICIT_PACKAGE_DEPENDS feature? > > >> Perhaps give a usage example or two? :) > > > > > > What about diffing the output of "make actual-package-depends" and "make > > > actual-package-depends -DEXPLICIT_PACKAGE_DEPENDS"? > > > > > > Simple Example: > > > > > > Port A depends upon B > > > Port B depends upon C > > > > > > Without the feature: > > > Port A registers dependencies to ports B and C > > > > > > With the feature: > > > Port A registers dependendcy to ports B > > > > Great, then it's just the feature I needed :) Thank you for the > > explanation. > > Not sure this can work reliably enough to be usefule at present, at least for > the specific scenario of avoiding unnecessary recompilations. I think there > are just too many ports with implicit dependencies, especially in the > KDE/GNOME domain.
Yes. I'm not even convinced this feature is a good idea. Kris _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
