From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1H0JGO-0003nX-5O for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 29 Dec 2006 15:03:16 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id kBTF2Lp0022918; Fri, 29 Dec 2006 15:02:21 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id kBTExtw1021150 for ; Fri, 29 Dec 2006 14:59:57 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02BEF6483D for ; Fri, 29 Dec 2006 14:59:57 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -1.163 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.163 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.064, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=1.5] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LqMp3rNxYAgA for ; Fri, 29 Dec 2006 14:59:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEB7B64311 for ; Fri, 29 Dec 2006 14:59:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1H0JCn-00052T-3I for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Fri, 29 Dec 2006 15:59:33 +0100 Received: from 82.152.196.25 ([82.152.196.25]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 29 Dec 2006 15:59:33 +0100 Received: from slong by 82.152.196.25 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 29 Dec 2006 15:59:33 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Steve Long Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Re: Re: Dependencies on system packages Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 15:00:57 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20061210011117.36672693@blashyrk> <200612171510.57159.jstubbs@gentoo.org> <20061217070429.126d8364@snowdrop> <200612171641.40343.jstubbs@gentoo.org> <20061217074812.497d4e78@snowdrop> <20061218084846.77600f69@snowdrop> <20061220102054.150d5f5a@snowdrop> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.152.196.25 User-Agent: KNode/0.10.4 Sender: news X-Archives-Salt: 465d7f7d-0fc7-470a-8ddb-3be65c69d770 X-Archives-Hash: 4bd52123666b0c42c1e9496a50a770a8 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > Steve Long wrote: > | How serious an issue is it in terms of deps on sys pkgs? > > Very. It means we can't realistically handle packages that, by using > autotools, depend upon the fifty odd system packages that are used by > autotools-generated code. > > | > | > DEPEND="virtual/c-toolchain" would indeed be nice, but it's a > | > | > rather large change... > | > | > > | > | How so? Isn't it simply a new meta? > | > > | > And an entire tree to update before it becomes meaningful. > | > > | Sure, but the changes can propagate thru as people update their > | ebuilds, no? > > The tricky part then is figuring out whether something doesn't dep upon > c-compiler because it doesn't need one or because the ebuilds haven't > been updated. > I'm out of my depth here- I can't see where that would be a problem? -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list