On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 09:42:25AM +0300, Eray Aslan wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 07:39:55AM +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > I can live with that, as long as the responsibility that packages work
> > with dependencies from overlays stays entirely with the overlay's
> > maintainer.
> 
> Good point.  Agreed.
> 
> > But could you please add a comment in the virtual's ebuild where (i.e.
> i> in which overlay) the additional dependencies can be found?
> 
> Done.

Better yet,

why don't welook into moving those packages from the overlays into the
main tree?

William