On Mittwoch, 25. Juli 2007, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > A: PDEPEND="B" > B: DEPEND="A" > > If this is what you call RDEPEND conceptually broken, then sorry for > useles try to explain it :) Maybe package manager could be smart enough > and relax the RDEPEND in such cases itself, maybe it's better to say > that via PDEPEND explicitly...
Of course a valid example - and yes, that's something the package manager should care about. Admitted, "conceptually broken" was a bit harsh, still both, that a pure runtime dependency gets built before the ebuild needing it by default and the need for PDEPEND seem ugly to me. Carsten
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
