On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 8:14 PM Michael Orlitzky <m...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > On 9/12/19 5:23 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote: > > > > Putting the dependencies in RDEPEND means users get stuck with yet > > another copy of the code installed, in addition to the copy that is > > statically linked into all reverse dependencies. > > > > It's not a very good solution to the problem. > > > > No argument there. The elegant solution to static linking is to not do > it. But I guess that's off the table? So now we're trying to find the > best not very good solution.
I'm really objecting to your suggestion that we abuse an existing Portage/PMS feature to do something beyond its design. Adding fictitious runtime dependencies is wrong, and seems like a very lazy solution. If you want to propose an extension to PMS to handle this situation, that's something I can support.
