this is not a "implicit vs explicit" thread; if you want that discussion start your own
we've said the relationship of DEPEND atoms in ebuilds should be independent of the DEPEND atoms found in eclasses as logically ebuilds should not care what it takes for eclasses to work and vice versa ... for the most part, this is true ... however, semi-recently, a change was made such that the implicit RDEPEND=$DEPEND was dropped from ebuilds if an inherited class set RDEPEND in any way ... that means if you have an ebuild at the moment that does: DEPEND="foo" and you dont inherit any eclasses, then you also get for free: RDEPEND="foo" if you decide to inherit eclasses though, you had better do some research as any eclass that does even RDEPEND="" will change that behavior ... or if you are an eclass writer and you decided to add RDEPEND to your eclass, you had better do a reverse check and make sure that any ebuild that inherits your eclass (directly or indirectly) does not utilize implicit RDEPEND behavior as you would have just broken it ... awesome ;) i posted a patch to fix this regression, but since it took so long before anyone noticed, zmedico wants to see if anyone is opposed (i dont know why they would be, but i cant think of everything) so to recap, the fix here changes it back to the historically documented behavior that the implicit RDEPEND happens in ebuilds regardless of what eclasses do -mike
pgpA8hD2UCNhx.pgp
Description: PGP signature
