On Wednesday 18 January 2012 15:45:04 Rich Freeman wrote: > On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 3:01 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > it is a problem. not all profiles use "coreutils" ... they provide > > replacement packages. busybox is just one example. the bsd/prefix guys > > go in even weirder directions. > > Yup - hence my point about coreutils not being a good one to include > unless you virtualized it, which probably is more than we'd really > want to do for a system package.
the virtual is irrelevant. it's noise regardless.
> > DEPEND usage is useless cruft to the point of absurdity.
> >
> > RDEPEND is much less common as then you're really only talking about the
> > random shell scripts. i'd argue still though that it still doesn't make
> > sense considering a system can hardly boot without "coreutils". and if
> > you are in a situation where you have such a reduced install that it
> > can, the existing @system semantics work for you.
>
> Again, you're using coreutils as an example, and that doesn't seem
> like something that would be much of a value-add to place in RDEPEND.
a shell ? sed ? grep ? find ? awk ? which ?
> However, if you had a package that required openssh, that would seem
> to be a much better candidate for an RDEPEND, since it is trivial to
> boot a system without openssh installed despite it being in system.
this is a bad example for many reasons:
- there are already talks of getting rid of it (in favor of stage4/etc...)
- this doesn't fall inline with our already long stated policy:
http://devmanual.gentoo.org/general-concepts/dependencies/index.html
- you're confusing the literal @system with implicit system deps
> Basically what I'm advocating is that somebody shouldn't have to
> defend their actions if they include something from @system in
> *DEPEND. Future maintainers are welcome to undo the work of previous
> maintainers as always. @system packages in *DEPEND should not be
> considered a bug (as long as they're right).
if it's part of the implicit system dep, they absolutely need to defend their
actions. you want to change the policy, then start a thread on it.
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
