On 09/18/2012 12:44 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> 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?
You will have to migrate those deps from RDEPEND to PDEPEND.
--
Thanks,
Zac
