On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 2:32 PM, Thomas Bächler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Miklos Vajna schrieb: >>> >>> I've been contemplating something like this for a while as well. What >>> do others on the list think, is this getting to be too much, or does >>> this make sense? I think I would be fine with it. We will need >>> documentation (namely PKGBUILD.5.txt) to be patched as well in the >>> final patch. > > Didn't think of that. > >> http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/2891 >> >> Aaron closed this as "Wont't implement" two years ago.
My name isn't Aaron, now is it? > It is a good feature for a packager. I am doing some packages where I always > have to build with -d, as some of the dependencies are never present at > build time. However, I still want makepkg to check whether all other > dependencies are there. I do see the use in this because I build regularly where I need to use the -d option, which unfortunately prevents a single dependency from being checked. Two years is a long time, so there has been plenty of time to reconsider, and I find the reasons in the bug report just as valid as they were two years ago. -Dan _______________________________________________ pacman-dev mailing list [email protected] http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev
