On 06/14/2011 03:54 PM, Brian Harring wrote: > On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 11:41:54PM -0500, William Hubbs wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 06:14:06AM +0200, Jeroen Roovers wrote: >>> On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 05:58:56 +0200 >>> Jeroen Roovers <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Judging from [1], a couple of thousands of ebuilds DEPEND on >>>> sys-apps/sed, which is a system package (in profiles/base/packages) >>>> since at least 2004. It boils down to some 2535 ebuilds, 1409 packages >>>> and 14 eclasses, some requiring a version as high as 4.0.5, which went >>>> stable in 2003. >> >> Since sys-apps/sed is a system package, I would vote for removing the >> dependency from the ebuilds/eclasses. > > The implicit system set dependency thing really, really needs to die; > at the time of the rule, portage couldn't handle resolving graphs of > that sort. PM resolvers for gentoo are generally a fair bit saner > now thus doing what you're suggesting isn't really beneficial (frankly > it causes some issues for stages, as zac noted). > > ~brian >
I fixed that implicit system depend rule[1] in devmanual some year ago to mention there are exceptions and leaving them out might break building order... "Note that this rule also needs consideration for packages like", "break building order", ... [1] http://devmanual.gentoo.org/general-concepts/dependencies/index.html But I'm fine with making it even more clear if that doesn't make the case as is - Samuli
