On Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 10:48:23AM -0500, Mike Meyer wrote:
> > I'm thinking through the automation of this right now. There are issues
> > with loops in the dependency graph which need to be detected and
> > resolved. Detection should not be an issue, resolution is
> > tougher. The "build twice" approach *may* be sufficient, but that horrid
> > possibility of each node exposing functionality that is dependent on a
> > predecessor worries me a (tiny) bit. Let's hope that most of the software
> > is well designed...
>
> I don't believe it's possible to have loops in the dependency graph.
> Computing the transitive closure of the dependency relationship is
> trivial using a matrix for the relationship. In the process, any loops
> will show up as 1's on the diagonal.
It's possible in theory (bsd.port.mk doesn't check for this and will
just loop forever), but since infinite looping is bad, in practise
there are none :-)
Kris
PGP signature
