Thomas Sachau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Sun, 12 Oct 2008 19:04:21 +0200:
> I see packages like bison, flex, perl or sed in the system set. And i > also see ebuilds depending on them. I also heard from Peter Volkov (pva) > that there where discussions about removing different packages from the > system set. So now my question is: > > Should we depend on all system packages? Should we depend on some > packages, because they could be removed? If yes, which ones? Or should > we leave the system packages out completly? The idea has been to reduce the system set, but packages coming out of it will of necessity need to be widely known. Meanwhile, in general, the system set should be reasonable to rely on in general. The cases where system packages are in depends should generally be limited to those in which it's necessary to resolve circular dependencies, with the help of USE=build and boostrap, or to other special cases (like a dependency on a specific USE flag on a system package, or where not all profiles may depend on the same system packages, etc). IOW, "normal" packages shouldn't need to specify "normal" dependencies on system packages. At least, that's how I've read the discussion I've seen to date. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
