[gentoo-dev] more broken depednencies

[gentoo-dev] more broken depednencies

[Spider]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 609 bytes --]

Oh yes! even more.

 Can people who feel like it take a look for all builds that contain the
word "newdepend"  and think at least twice?  remember.. newdepend means
that RDEPEND won't be set (unless you do newrdepend)  which means that
the package will be broken in GRP situations.

(Yep, its a known fact that all of  KDE  is broken and unless fixed
cannot be reliably distributed on our next release.)

( same goes for XFCE )

//Spider
  -  qa annoyance team.

-- 
begin  .signature
This is a .signature virus! Please copy me into your .signature!
See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information.
end

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] more broken depednencies

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: signed data --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 526 bytes --]

On Saturday 27 December 2003 19:24, Spider wrote:
> Oh yes! even more.
>
>  Can people who feel like it take a look for all builds that contain the
> word "newdepend"  and think at least twice?  remember.. newdepend means
> that RDEPEND won't be set (unless you do newrdepend)  which means that
> the package will be broken in GRP situations.
>
> (Yep, its a known fact that all of  KDE  is broken and unless fixed
> cannot be reliably distributed on our next release.)

the newXdepend's should only be used in eclasses
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 827 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] more broken depednencies

[Spider]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 863 bytes --]

begin  quote
On Sat, 27 Dec 2003 20:22:53 -0500
Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Saturday 27 December 2003 19:24, Spider wrote:
> > Oh yes! even more.
> >
> >  Can people who feel like it take a look for all builds that contain
> >  the
> > word "newdepend"  and think at least twice?  remember.. newdepend
> > means that RDEPEND won't be set (unless you do newrdepend)  which
> > means that the package will be broken in GRP situations.
> >
> > (Yep, its a known fact that all of  KDE  is broken and unless fixed
> > cannot be reliably distributed on our next release.)
> 
> the newXdepend's should only be used in eclasses


Even worse, there are ~300 ebuilds in the tree that uses them.


//Spider

-- 
begin  .signature
This is a .signature virus! Please copy me into your .signature!
See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information.
end

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] more broken depednencies

[Paul de Vrieze]

[-- Attachment #1: signed data --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 1037 bytes --]

On Sunday 28 December 2003 03:32, Spider wrote:
> begin  quote
> On Sat, 27 Dec 2003 20:22:53 -0500
>
> Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > On Saturday 27 December 2003 19:24, Spider wrote:
> > > Oh yes! even more.
> > >
> > >  Can people who feel like it take a look for all builds that contain
> > >  the
> > > word "newdepend"  and think at least twice?  remember.. newdepend
> > > means that RDEPEND won't be set (unless you do newrdepend)  which
> > > means that the package will be broken in GRP situations.
> > >
> > > (Yep, its a known fact that all of  KDE  is broken and unless fixed
> > > cannot be reliably distributed on our next release.)
> >
> > the newXdepend's should only be used in eclasses
>
> Even worse, there are ~300 ebuilds in the tree that uses them.

It might have been an idea for that the people changing the semantics would 
also have announced the need for a fix.

Paul

-- 
Paul de Vrieze
Gentoo Developer
Mail: pauldv@gentoo.org
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net

[-- Attachment #2: signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]