maillog: 09/07/2006-17:17:59(+0100): John Mylchreest types > I've tried to clarify my point fairly well above, but the dependancy > is fairly strict by design. What in linux-mod except for my specific > example above would continue to work if there were no kernel sources > present? (I do of course know the answer but its rhetorical) > > To that end is the reason why the dependancy still exists. That said, > I'm open to persuasion.
I'm having trouble putting my thoughts in order, so I'll just throw them out, hoping it would make some sense. - if linux-sources is a dependency, then the package usually would need to be rebuilt if the kernel configuration/sources change (linux-mod already faciliates that for a good reason) - even if an ebuild is being smart and is only using linux-info to throw informational messages, the sources dependency is still there - an ebuild should specify the linux-sources dependency on its own if it really needs the sources Having said that, out of the 62 packages that inherit linux-info and do not inherit linux-mod: - 23 only make .config checks (should be non-fatal anyway) - 9 install kernel modules (so they should rather inherit linux-mod) - 8 need the kernel sources to build, so they should probably inherit linux-mod as well - 6 have a DEPEND=virtual/linux-sources already - 4 use linux-info to modify runtime behavior - 2 are obsolete This is only the easily classifiable stuff, but it certainly does seem that the linux-sources dependency can be pulled out of the eclass. -- /\ Georgi Georgiev /\ You have a truly strong individuality. /\ \/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] \/ \/ /\ http://www.gg3.net/ /\ /\
pgpd6vB3yLpHY.pgp
Description: PGP signature
