At 20:58 Uhr +0900 10.10.2002, Peter O'Gorman wrote: >On Thursday, October 10, 2002, at 07:22 PM, Max Horn wrote: > >>I'd like to add some new fields in the near future: >> >>"RuntimeDepends" >> >>Comments? Problems with those? Other similiar fields that might be >>needed in your opinion? >> > >Wouldn't this objective be achieved without a new field, but instead >using BuildDepends: for *all* the buildtime dependencies and Depends >for just the runtime dependencies. > >i.e. A package currently having: >Depends: foo-shlibs, bar >BuildDepends: foo, foo-bin, bar-dev > >Would instead become: >Depends: foo-shlibs, bar >BuildDepends: foo-shlibs, foo, foo-bin, bar, bar-dev > >Then the package manager could be changed to not add the Depends: >field to the builddepends one at build time. > >But, perhaps a new field is needed, rather than having to rewrite >all the info files in one go..
That is the exact reason for my suggestion (I should have mentioned it). IMHO it's a bad idea to change the meaning of a core field in such an essential way. > I vote for the option that means less work for me :-) Which would be the additional field. New packages would work as they do right now. Max -- ----------------------------------------------- Max Horn Software Developer email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> phone: (+49) 6151-494890 ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
