Are we forbidden from DEPEND=RDEPEND...? I only ask because 90% of the dev-perl portions would fall into that category - if it's an rdepend, it can be a depend as well (technically you can build without most of the underlying rdepends, but you will get warnings from perl that prereqs weren't met). And if so, which is preferred - globbing the list in rdepend and having depend=rdepend, or globbing it in depend and having rdepend=depend? Thanks :)
~M (i'm old, humor me) On Tuesday 05 July 2005 08:00 pm, Sven Wegener wrote: > Hi all! > > Short explanation for the subject: A *DEPEND mismatch is when a package > is listed in DEPEND, but missing in RDEPEND and vice versa. I have a > list of ebuilds at http://dev.gentoo.org/~swegener/qa/depend-mismatches > that contain such mismatches. I've already whitelisted packages like > automake and autoconf, that are safe to be only in DEPEND. And I also > whitelisted packages like emul-linux-x86-baselibs for being > RDEPEND-only. Pure meta packages like gnome-base/gnome or kde-base/kde > have everything whitelisted for RDEPEND and everything blacklisted for > DEPEND. Additional blacklistings include virtual/modutils for DEPEND. > > This check is important, because when merging binary packages portage > will only install RDEPEND and when building stages (via ROOT support) > DEPEND will go to / and RDEPEND will got to the specified ROOT. I want > to clean *DEPEND up, so that we have sane dependencies. Currently, for > normal merging, portage forces both DEPEND and RDEPEND to be installed, > even after the merging is complete. This might or will change in the > future and break packages that have these mismatches. > > I want developers to take a look at the list and see if packages they > maintain are listed. I'm aware that the list is quite large and still > contains a lot of false positives. I can whitelist packages for DEPEND > or RDEPEND either general, based on eclass usage or for a specific > package. If you are sure that your package has a safe mismatch, I can > add it to the whitelist. But please one after the other, this is just an > initial test. > > Cheers, > Sven -- -----o()o--------------------------------------------- Michael Cummings | #gentoo-dev, #gentoo-perl Gentoo Perl Dev | on irc.freenode.net -----o()o---------------------------------------------
pgpHt9BvjmO3E.pgp
Description: PGP signature
