From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Kp6w4-0000ye-DM for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 12 Oct 2008 19:49:04 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 02C0AE0435; Sun, 12 Oct 2008 19:49:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9F69E0435 for ; Sun, 12 Oct 2008 19:49:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8721E6478A for ; Sun, 12 Oct 2008 19:49:02 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -2.338 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.338 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.261, BAYES_00=-2.599] 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 7+o-LGXMPcSg for ; Sun, 12 Oct 2008 19:48:55 +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 6E11664593 for ; Sun, 12 Oct 2008 19:48:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Kp6vl-0001xE-Sv for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Sun, 12 Oct 2008 19:48:45 +0000 Received: from ip68-231-12-43.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.231.12.43]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 12 Oct 2008 19:48:45 +0000 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-231-12-43.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 12 Oct 2008 19:48:45 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: System packages in (R)DEPEND? Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2008 19:48:39 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <48F22E15.5050604@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-231-12-43.ph.ph.cox.net User-Agent: Pan/0.133 (House of Butterflies) Sender: news Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 8c8bfab3-8984-4325-a626-31ea4c621693 X-Archives-Hash: 6f393f58e4a2db3fd9dcb46a1cf45538 Thomas Sachau posted 48F22E15.5050604@gentoo.org, excerpted below, on Sun, 12 Oct 2008 19:04:21 +0200: > I see packages like bison, flex, perl or sed in the system set. And i > also see ebuilds depending on them. I also heard from Peter Volkov (pva= ) > that there where discussions about removing different packages from the > system set. So now my question is: >=20 > Should we depend on all system packages? Should we depend on some > packages, because they could be removed? If yes, which ones? Or should > we leave the system packages out completly? The idea has been to reduce the system set, but packages coming out of it= =20 will of necessity need to be widely known. Meanwhile, in general, the system set should be reasonable to rely on in=20 general. The cases where system packages are in depends should generally= =20 be limited to those in which it's necessary to resolve circular=20 dependencies, with the help of USE=3Dbuild and boostrap, or to other=20 special cases (like a dependency on a specific USE flag on a system=20 package, or where not all profiles may depend on the same system=20 packages, etc). IOW, "normal" packages shouldn't need to specify "normal" dependencies on= =20 system packages. At least, that's how I've read the discussion I've seen= =20 to date. --=20 Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman