Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Paul <dufflebunk AT dufflebunk.homeip.net>]

On Tue, 2004-29-06 at 18:26 -0700, Andrew wrote:
<snip>
> As far as your issues with cleanse not living up to its name, what other
> option would you like? How else would you fix a dependency? I suppose if
> the dependency was optional we could change it to be off, but in terms
> of something thats absolutly required what other choice do we have?
> Delete it? Thats only legal if the spell no longer depends on B, and
> its not easy to determine that short of recasting the spell, which in
> your case you did, and you might want to recast some stuff to avoid
> upgrade issues. Of course if the dependency no longer exists the spell
> should be up for upgrading...
If the dependency is optional it does give you a choice to turn it off
and recast. The problem in this case may to be that he switched X
providers, from xfree to x.org. All the spells think they depend on
xfree still, but it's not installed. When a missing dependency is found
which is a provider of something, cleanse should look to see if any of
the other providers are installed, but that case hasn't been added yet.
It would be non-trivial to add that in, since it currently drops
provider info. 

You can fix this with a sed expression, which I can't think of right
now, but has been sent to this list before.

Another project on my todo list is detection of stale dependency info by
re-running the DEPENDS file in a special environment. This would be a
big help to cleanse since it has to ask and guess about it.


> I sympathize with how annoying this, but please realize that our
> dependency system is not a simple thing. I dont know of another
> distribution that offers as much flexibility as our system does. Binary
> distros have a hard wired, static depends tree, so they can never get
> into this problem (nevermind that its hard to have a binary package
> fail to install). Neither gentoo nor freebsd's ports (to my knowledge)
> offer the same degree of control we do either, they seem to just vaguely
> touch on the notion of "optional" dependency. We've also made mistakes in
> the past and cast has been rather poor at cleaning up state files after
> itself, so theres quite a few rough edges Im doing my best to sand down.
> Please bare with us...
I'm not getting naked with you Andrew, no matter how many times you ask.

> 
> Thanks
> Andrew
> _______________________________________________
> SM-Discuss mailing list
> SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss
>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part