On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 12:40:51 -0700
Zac Medico <zmed...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 09/18/2012 12:29 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 12:25:57 -0700
> > Zac Medico <zmed...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >> Also, if we change the meaning of RDEPEND in the next EAPI, so that
> >> it's a hard build-time dep like DEPEND, then DEPEND="${RDEPEND}
> >> virtual/pkgconfig" can be reduced to DEPEND="virtual/pkgconfig".
> >> This is what I would like to do for the experimental EAPI
> >> 5-hdepend which is planned [1].
> >
> > What're we going to do about the zillions of unsolvable cycles that
> > that would create? (Does Portage detect those and error out yet?)
>
> Yeah, it would be treated just like a DEPEND cycle, which is already
> detected and treated as a fatal error. As a result, when bumping the
> EAPI of an ebuild, you may have to migrate some deps from RDEPEND to
> PDEPEND in order to solve the cycles.What about the large number of RDEPENDs that are required for a package to be usable, but not for it to be installed? -- Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
