On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 18:17 -0500, Brian Jackson wrote:
> Martin Schlemmer wrote:
> > On Fri, 2005-07-01 at 15:59 -0700, Drake Wyrm wrote:
> > 
> >>Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>>On Friday 01 July 2005 12:25 pm, Brian D. Harring wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>Currently, we pretty much leave out the big dogs of build depends from
> >>>>ebuilds- basically we rely on the profile to require a suitable
> >>>>toolchain.  Couple of issues with this though-
> >>>
> >>>so what you're proposing is that we add binutils/gcc/glibc to every package 
> >>>that compiles something
> >>
> >>Can you compile without binutils/gcc/glibc? No? Then you need it.
> >>
> >>
> >>>make to every package that uses make, 
> >>
> >>Again, if you depend on make, then DEPEND on make.
> >>
> >>
> >>>sed/grep/bash/coreutils to every package which runs configure
> >>
> >>That's quite an interesting case. Yes, those should be in DEPEND, but it
> >>might be prudent to create an appropriate shortcut instead of explicitly
> >>adding each of those.
> >>
> > 
> > 
> > This is all well and dandy, but try to add coreutils as a dependency of
> > itself, or gcc of itself, or sed ... or grep ... etc, and then try to do
> > a stage1 install (probably stage2/3 as well, but I never do those, so
> > rather wont comment).
> 
> Big picture here:
> * BDEPEND does nothing now, so don't worry about it if you don't want to
> * in the future it will make other things possible
> * give the man problems you see with the proposal, not just tell him that 
> portage doesn't handle it right now... I think out of anyone, he knows what 
> portage does and doesn't handle
> 

I did ask Brian in another reply how he thought to implement it.

This one however I read as Drake saying/asking that we should start
doing it now, and I tried to explain why we could not up until now, and
still cannot.   Correct me if I interpreted it wrongly.


-- 
Martin Schlemmer
Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop/System Team Developer
Cape Town, South Africa