maillog: 09/07/2006-17:17:59(+0100): John Mylchreest types
> I've tried to clarify my point fairly well above, but the dependancy
> is fairly strict by design. What in linux-mod except for my specific
> example above would continue to work if there were no kernel sources
> present? (I do of course know the answer but its rhetorical)
> To that end is the reason why the dependancy still exists. That said,
> I'm open to persuasion.

I'm having trouble putting my thoughts in order, so I'll just throw them
out, hoping it would make some sense.

- if linux-sources is a dependency, then the package usually would need
  to be rebuilt if the kernel configuration/sources change (linux-mod
  already faciliates that for a good reason)
- even if an ebuild is being smart and is only using linux-info to throw
  informational messages, the sources dependency is still there
- an ebuild should specify the linux-sources dependency on its own if it
  really needs the sources

Having said that, out of the 62 packages that inherit linux-info and do
not inherit linux-mod:

- 23 only make .config checks (should be non-fatal anyway)
- 9 install kernel modules (so they should rather inherit linux-mod)
- 8 need the kernel sources to build, so they should probably inherit
  linux-mod as well
- 6 have a DEPEND=virtual/linux-sources already
- 4 use linux-info to modify runtime behavior
- 2 are obsolete

This is only the easily classifiable stuff, but it certainly does seem
that the linux-sources dependency can be pulled out of the eclass.

/\   Georgi Georgiev   /\ You have a truly strong individuality.     /\
\/    [EMAIL PROTECTED]    \/                                            \/
/\ /\                                            /\

Attachment: pgpd6vB3yLpHY.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to